ML20211E030
| ML20211E030 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1997 |
| From: | Schopfer D SARGENT & LUNDY, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| CON-9583-100 NUDOCS 9709300024 | |
| Download: ML20211E030 (51) | |
Text
-._.
/
k
(
Sar gerytKLundy"*
- Don K. Schopler Vice President 312-269-6078 September 26,1997 Project No. 9583-100 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: Document Control Desk
- Washington, D.C. 20555 I have enclosed the following twenty nine (29) discrepancy reports (DRs) identified during our review activities for the ICAVP. These DRs are being distributed in accordance with the Communications Protocol, PI-MP3-01.
DR No. DR-MP3-0077 DR No. DR-MP3-0204 DR No. DR-MP3-0090 DR No. DR-MP3-0229
. DR No. DR-MP3-0092 DR No. DR-MP3-0230 DR No. DR-MP3-0159 DR No. DR-MP3-0241 g
DR No. DR-MP3-0162 DR No. DR-MP3-0246 DR No. DR-MP3-0165 DR No. DR-MP3-0247
/
DR No. DR-MP3-0168 DR No. DR-MP3-0248 DR No. DR-MP3-0175 DR No. DR-MP3-0249 DR No. DR-MP3-0180 DR No. DR-MP3-0251 DR No. DR-MP3-0182 DR No. DR-MP3-0252 DR No. DR-MP3-0191 DR No. DR-MP3-0253 DR No. DR-MP3-0194 DR No. DR-MP3-0259 DR No. DR-MP3-0195 DR No. DR-MP3-0260 DR No. DR-MP3-0202 DR No. DR-MP3-0262 DR No. DR-MP3-0274 9709300024 970926 PDR ADOCK 0500 3
lllllll llllll 55 East Monroe Street
- Chicago. IL 60603-5780 USA + 312-269 2000
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission September 26,- 1997 Document Control Desk Project No. 9583-100 Page 2 I have also enclosed the following six (6) DRs that have been determined to be invalid.
No action is required from Northeast Utilities for these six DRs. The basis for their invahd determination is included on the document.
DR No. DR-MP3-0031 DR No. DR MP3-0164 DR No. OR-MP3-0209 DR No. DR-MP3-0215 DR No. DR-MP3-0218 DR No. DR-MP3-0222 Please direct any questions to me at (312) 269-6078.
Yours very tmly, b
g D. K. Se opfer l
Vice President and ICAVP Manager DKS:spr Enclosures Copies:
E. Imbro (1/l) Deputy Director, ICAVP Oversight T. Concannon (1/l) Nuclear Energy Advisory Council J. Fougere (1/1) NU nr\\icavpbwr\\97mr0926a. doc
4 Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3-0077 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALID Review Element: System Design Potential Operability issue Discipline: Mechanical Design Q y,,
Discre,ancy Type: Calculation
@ No SystemfProcess: OSS l
NRc Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: W2SS7 Disc'epancy: Discrepancies in QSS Effective Time, Actuation Time and EDG~
Start Time.
==
Description:==
Licensing documents and calculations contain discrepancies with respect to Quench Spray System (QSS) spray effective time, OSS spray actuation time, and Diesel Generator start time.
QSS Spray Maximum Effective Reference Time (sec)
FSAR Sec 6.2.2.2 app eximately 68.2 without offsite power 3DBS-NSS-002 no more than 70.2 without offsite power US(B)-253 Rev 4 71.2 without offsite power US(B)-225 Rev 6 70.2 without offsite power FSAR Table 6.216 71.5 with min!mbm ESF Orig SER Sec 6.2.2 64.0, power availability not provided FSAR dec 6.5.2.2 less than 65.0, power availability not provided FSAR Sec 6.2.1.1.3.7 max of 57.2 with offsite power 3DBS-NSS-002 no more than 52.2 with offsite power US(B)-253 Rev 4 57.2 with offsite power US(B)-225 Rev 6 52.2 with offsite power 4
QSS Spray Maximum Reference Actuation Time (sec)
FSAR Sec 6 2.2 16 without offsite power, diesel generator starting, sequencer delay 3DBS-NSS-002 19 without offsite power, diesel generator starting, sequencer delay Diesel Generator Start Time f.. lerences (sec)
TRM Table 3.3.2.1
< 12 3DBS-NSS-002 14 US(B)-225 Rev 6 14 Printed 9/2&97 3:18:40PM Page 1 of 2
l Northea:t Utilities ICAVP DR Ns. DR MP3-0077 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report FSAR Sec 6.2.2.2 11 Notes:
Calculation US(B)-225 provides the predicted times based on system operating parameters.
Calculation US(B)-253 provides the times used in the design basis Loss of Coolant Analysis, Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Feingold, D. J.
O O
O S/18/97 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony ^
O O
O S'157 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q
O O
S/1S'87 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q
Q O
B05/97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously idertifled by NU7 O Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date gg, F D. J.
VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 22M7 3:18:47 PM Page 2 of 2 I
4 Nerthe'st Utilities ICAVP DR N. DR-MP3-0090 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALID Review Eiernent: System Design Discipl6ne: Structural Design PotentialOperability lasue Discrepancy Type: Calculation Q y,,
Systern/ Process: SWP
@ No NPC Significance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Pipe Support Calculation NP(F)-ZO19A 133 Discrepancy
==
Description:==
We have reviewed the Pipe Support Calculation no. NP(F)-
2019A 133, Rev.7 including CCN no.1 and CCN no.2. Based upon this review,WJ have noted the following discrepancies:
- 1. Dimensions used in STRUDL Modelinput are not consistent with those shown on the support drawing no. BZ 19A 19-3,Rev.0 Review of GRITS data base revealed no open change documents posted against this drawing.Since the aforementioned differences exceed the design allowances provided for installation tolerances,they need to be addressed for theirimpact on the results of the computer analysis and engineering judgment statements on pages 21 and 22,
- 2. CCN no.1 and CCN no.2 utilize comparison method to evaluate the impact of the latest loads on the results of base plate analysis. Load factors based on the comparison of the new and old loads are as follows:
LF=0.65 for Fx load component LF=1.195 for Fz load component Comparisons on page no. 6 of CCN no.1 are based on application of both 0.65 load factor (for Fx component) and 1.195 load factor (for Fy component).
Comparisons on page 6 of CCN no.2 only take into account lower load factor of 0.65.
In lieu of performing the detailed re-analysis based on the actual magnitude of new loads,ii ls acceptable to apply load factors provided the highest one is used for the purpose of the comparison.This methodology ensures that consistent and conservative approach is used.
Therefore,the methodologies utilized in CCN no.1 and CCN no.2 is discrepant because it does not provide a conservative assessment of the revised loads on the existing analysis results.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date Initiator: Patel, A.
O O
Q 9/23/97 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
9/23/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K Q
Q Q
9/2597 l~tC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
9/2s/97 Date:
INVALID:
Prtrad9/2697e:ss:o1 AM Page 1 of 2
- ~
l N:rtheast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR-MP3-0090 Millstone Unit 3 l
Discrepancy Report Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identined by NU? O Yes @ No Review Acc$a kceMaW W Date initiator: Patet,A.
O O
O VT Lead: Neft, Anthony A O
Q VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
G IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O B
Date:
SL Comments:
Printed Ev26,'97 B:55:06 AM Pap 2 of 2 l
1
Northert Utiliths ICAVP DR N:. DR-MP3-0092 Millstone Unk 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALID Rmw EW: S#em %n l
Diecipline: Structural Design Potential Operability issue Discrepancy Type: Calculation O Ya gg i
Systern/ Process: SWP NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Publiched:
Discrepancy: Pipe Support Calculation 12179-NP(B)-Z19G-106, Rev.4 Discrepancy
==
Description:==
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, @ joint 131, force X should be 218# instead of 108#.
This error may not have any significant Impact on analysis as it is not a governing load case.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date Inltlator: Patel, A.
O O
O 9/22s7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
st23ra7 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K Q
O O
S':5S7 IRC Chnn: Singh, Anand K Q
O O
st2ss7 Dei.:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by Nur (.) Yes @ No Review initiator: Patel, A.
VT Lead: Neri, Ardhony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Sin 0h. Anand K
_ e:
SL Comments:
Printed 9/2697 8.55:44 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR MP3-0159 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Accident Melgaton DR VALID Discipline: Other Potential Operability issue D6screpancy Type: Licensing Document i
System / Process: N/A g
l NRC Significance level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepency: Discreponcles between FSAR commitments and Fuel Drop Monitor setpoint.
==
Description:==
FSAR Section 15.7.4, Fuel Handling Accident, states that there are radiation monitors inside containment that will respond to a fuel handling accident inside containment (FHAIC) and isolate the containment purge ventilation system, preventing any release of radioactivity to the environment. The setpoint basis and calculation methodology is not consistent with this commitment as discussed below.
This discrepancy was identified by the ICAVP during the review of the following documents related to the fuel drop monitors, 3RMS*41&42:
A) Unit 3 Millstone FSAR-Section 15.7.4 B) Millstone Unit 3 Radiation Monitor Manual dated 4/11/97 C) Unit 3 Millstone Calculation Alarm Setpoint Calculation-RE41,42 D) EPIP 4400, Rev. 4 Event Assessment, Classification and Reportability.
The Fuel Handling Accident (FHA) is a design basis accident that is required to be evaluated in the FSAR for potential off site consequences. It involves the non-mechanistic assumption that a fuel assembly is dropped during movement, rupturing all of the fuel pins in the assembly and causing the release of radioactive gases into the fuel building or containment.
A review of the documents above identified the following issues relative to the setpoint basis for the fuel drop monitors:
- 1) The FSAR states that "Upon sensing high radioactivity, the radiation monitors send a signal to the containment isolation valves for valve closure... In the event of the fuel assembly being dropped in the refueling cavity, the containment purge isolation valves close before any radioactivity can reach the isolation valves." However, the calculation contained in Reference C calculates a setpoint based on effluent releases.
Also, the stated purpose of the radiation monitors in Reference B, page 90, is "to minimize off-site releases following a fuel handling accident." It further states that "The alarm setpoint of 0.92 R/hr is based on isolating the purge at a release rate which would result in 10CFR20 concentration limits of Xe-133 at the Printed 9/26/97 8.56:28 AM Page 1 of 3
4 Northezt Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR MP3-0159 uillstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report site boundary." Therefore the FSAR and the referenced documents are in conflict.
- 2) The setpoint calculation, Reference C, is based on a "Chariie-two release limit for vent 0.03 uCl/cc', A Chartle-two event classification is defined in the Emergency Plan implementing Procedures (EPIP) as a Site Area Emergency, which is more severe than the Fuel Handling Accident (Charlie-one or Alert),
which is more severe than 10CFR20 release limits (Delta-two or Unusual Event).
The ICAVP review of the setpoint calculation (Reference C) also identifies the following issues with the calculation methodology; a)As stated in Item 2), the Monitor calculated setpoint is based on a concentration in the effluent. This calculation estimates a uaiform concentration in containment which produces the effluent concentration and uses this to determine the monitor response. The postulated FHAIC, however, is expected to produce a bubble of gas above the refueling pool which travels to the purge duct. The response of the monitor will depend on the location of the accident and the pathway of the bubble to the purge. Therefore, the uniform concentration assumed in the calculation is not consistent with the accident.
b) All of the activity released is assumed to be Xe-133, which has a low decay energy. Although most of the noble gas activity in the assembly will probably be Xe-133, the monitor response may be dominated by more energetic nuclides.
c) The unliorm cloud inside containment is corrected for finite size using the finite cloud correction factor formula from a paper on control room habitability by Murphy Campe. This formula was developed for the energetic, post-LOCA nuclide mix and use of this formula may not be consistent with Xe 133 alone.
d) The monitor response to the cloud of activity in containment is assumed to be equivalent to a dose conversion factor from Regulatory Guide 1.109 for whole body dose at a depth of 5 cm.
It is expected that the monitor response would be closer to ik dose rate in air.
e) The Charlie-two effluent concentration in the current EPIP is 0.1 uCl/cc rather than the value of 0.03 used in the setpoint calculation.
CONCLUSION:
The issues identified in this discrepancy report (DR) pertain to the documentation of the Monitor setpoint rather than the design of the system. Therefore, this discrepancy report is assigned a significance Level 3. If resolution of this DR requires that the monitor setpoint be lowered or that the FHAIC is not bounded by the FHA in the fuel building, the significance level will be reassessed.
Daulaw Printed 9/26/97 8:56.32 AM Page 2 of 3
)
b
N:rtheart Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR-MP3-0159 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Valid Invalid
'M Date initiator: Schwartz, Barry 9/1697 VT Lead: Rahoja, Raj D 9/1697 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O
9/16N7 IRC Chmn: Shgh, Anand K 9/2597 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously iden3 fled by NU? (.) Yes (9) No Review initiator: Schwartz, Barry VT Lead: Rahoja, Raj D VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
d Pnnted 9/2697 8:56.35 AM Page 3 of 3 l
l 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0162 MillstDne Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Accklent Mdget.on DR VALID Potential Operability issue Discipline: Other O Ya Discrepancy Type: Licensing Document gg SystemrProcess: N/A NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpency: FSAR inconsistency With Calculation of Record
==
Description:==
A review of the following documents bas concluded that an inconsistency exists between the calculation of record for the locked rotor accident (N Loop and N-1 Loop cases) radiological analyses and the Millstone 3 (MP3) FSAR. The documents.
reviewed are:
- 1) MP3 FSAR Table 15.3-3
- 2) 89-012101RA, Rev. 0 - Doses to Exclusion Area Boundary (EAB) and Low Population Zone (LPZ) from a Locked Rotor Accident, N Loop operation
- 3) 89-012-102RA, Rev. 0 Doses to EAB and LPZ from a Locked Rotor Accident, N-1 Loop Operation FSAR Table 15.3-3 indicates that for the N-Loop and N-1 Loop cases the activity released to the reactor coolant from failed fuel is 3% of the noble gas and iodine inventory. This is inconsistent with the values in the referenced calculations which are 6% and 4.4% for the N Loop and N-1 Loop cases respectively. The referenced calculations were performed specifically to address new failed fuel fractions identified in the MP3 Cycle 3 reload analyses. The MP3 FSAR has not been updated to reflect these values.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date Initiator: Bennett, L A.
O O
O SSS7 VT Lead: Rahoja. Raj D G
O O
8'ic'S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K G
O O
S/1SS7 IRC chmn: singh, Anand K G
O O
st2s/97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? (.) Yes fG) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date gg.
VT Lead: Rahoje, Raj D VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date:
e, e-Pnnted s/26/9710:31T34W ~~
Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0162 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report J
Printed 9/269710:31:30 AM Pa 2W 2
(
Northe:st UtilMies ICAVP DR N2, DR-MP3-0165 Millstone unM 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: Systern DR VALID Review Element: Systern Design Discipline: Mechanical Design PotentialOperability issue O ves Discrepancy Type: Calculaton (el No SystemProcess: RsS NRC Significance level: 4 Date FAKod to NU:
Date Published:
Disc apancy: Minimum Wall Calculations Reference the FSKs for Design Temperature and Pressure Descript6on: The minimum wall calculations reference the flow diagrams (FSKs) for the design temperature and pressure of the lines.
The FSKs are "For Information Only" documents and are superseded by the piping diagrams and the line list. The desing temperature used in Calculation MW(F) 122 is different from the value in the line list.
MW(F)-122 Line List Temperature 235 260 Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Langel, D.
0 0
0 S23S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
o 23,97 VT Mgr; schopfer, Don K O
O O
Sc5'S7 IRC Chmn: sgh, Anand K Q
Q Q
&"25/97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K SL Comrnents:
Printed 9C6/97 8:58:37 AM Page 1 of 1
Northe0st Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0168 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR VALID Review Element: System Design D6ecipline: Electrical Design Pmial @ramyluue O ve.
D6screpancy Type: Licensing DocM (9) No System / Process: SWP NRC $6gnificance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: FSAR Description of operation of 3SWP*MOV50 valves does not match drawing information Ducription: The description of the operation of valves 3SWP*MOV50A, B, C
& D does not agree with the logic and schematic drawings.
FSAR page 9.2 5 states: "An automatic control interlock prevents the opening of the reactor plant component cooling water heat exchanger isolation valves when the isolation valves to the containment recirculation coolers are open."
Based on a review of the drawings the statement and drawings do not agree, The drawings indict ) that the interlock prevents the opening of the 38WP*MOV50 valves (Reactor Plant Component Cooling Heat Exchanger Service Water Supply) when either of the associated 3SWP*MOV54 valves (Containment Recirculation Cooler Service Water Supply) is not fully closed. This interlock is bypassed, however, if both of the associated Service Water pumps are running, The statement does not take into account the bypass option.
Based on a review of the following drawings:
ESK 06AAF Rev 09 Elem Diag 480V MC Containment Recirc Ctr Serv Wtr Supply Viv [3SWP*MOV54A]
ESK-06AAG Rev 10 Elem Diag 480V MC Containment Recirc Clr Serv Wtr Supply Viv [3SWP*MOV54B]
ESK-06AAH Rev 08 Elem Diag 480V MC Containment Recirc Clr Serv Wtr Supply Viv [3SWP*MOV54C]
I ESK-06AAJ Rev 09 Elem Diag 480V MC Containment Recirc Clr Serv Wtr Supply Viv [3SWP*MOV54E]
ESK-06AAK Rev 09 Elem Diag 480V MC Reactor Plant Comp Cig Ht Exch Serv Wtr Supply Vlv [3SWP*MOV50A]
ESK-06AAL Rev 08 Elem Diag 480V MC Fs..sctor Plant Comp Clg Ht Exch Serv Wtr Supply Viv [3SWP*MOV50B]
LSK-09-01G Rev 11 Logic Diagram Reactor Plant Component Cooling Water Review Valid Invalid Needed Date inXiator: Warner,1.
8 O
O S'18 S7 VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A O
O O
S/18S7 Printed 9/26/97 9.01:17 AM U N' 5 Y
'""N PIhb 2
N:rthea:t Utilities ICAVP DR Pds. DR-MP3-0168 Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
S'1SS7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
S25/S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? ( ) Yes (#) No Review CY*
NI' initiator: Warner,1.
O O
VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A O
O VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K b
IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
oei.:
SL Comments:
Printed SQSS7 9.01:22 AM Pg 2 of 2
Northecst Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3-0175 Minstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR VALID I Y' **
Potential Operability issue Discipline: Electrical Design O Ya Discrepar. y Type: Licorning Docsenent
@ No SystemfProcess: sWP
~
NRC Significance lev 0: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpancy: FSAR Description of MCC & rod control area booster pump operation does not match drawing information Descriptior.: The description of the MCC and rod control area booster pump c,nersilon does not match the logic a,1d schematic drawings, FSAR Section 9.2.1.2 pages 9.2-4 & 5 state: "MCC and rod control srea booster pumps, one on each service water header, provide the additional head required to circulate service water through the MCC and rod control area air conditioning units when chilled water flow to these units is lost, in the event of a high temperature in the retum duct to the MCC and rod control area air handling unit, or an Loss of Offsite Power (LOP), the pumps will automatically start if the associated air conditioning unit is operating,"
This description does not match the schematic and logic drawings. Based on the drawings the pumps will not start if booster pump suction pressure is low for greater than 20 seconds along with the conditions defined in the description.
This was verified by a review of the following drawings:
ESK-06SM Rev 11 Elem Diag 480V MC MCC Rod & Cable Vault ACU [3HVR*ACU1A,1B]
ESK-06ALG Rev 07 Elem Diag 480V MC MCC & Rod Control Area Booster Pumps [3SWP*P3A,3B]
LSK-09-10E Rev 17 Logic Diagram Service Water System LSK 22-01K Rev 08 Logic Diagiam Reactor Plant Ventilation Review Valid invalid Needed Date Initiator: Warner, I-0 0
0 S/15/97 i
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
S/15'S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
S/17'37 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
Sas/S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Pre $ lously identifMxl by NU? L) Yes @ No Printed 9CM7 9.02:04 AM Page 1 of 2
emmy.mmmmm--
N:rthe ct Utilit' s ICAVP DR N2, DR MP3-0175 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Pnnted 9/26/97 9:02:09 AM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N. DR-MP3-0180 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Repoft Review Group: Programrnetic DR VALID Review Element: Change Process Diecipl6ne: Other PotentialOperability issue O vos Discrepancy Type: Ucensing Document
@ No System / Process: N/A NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Technical Justification for Changes to FSAR
==
Description:==
The Final Safety Analysis Report Change Request (FSARCR) packages discussed below did not contain sufficient documented technicaljustification for the changes to FSAR.
Discussion:
The following FSARCR packages have been reviewed and it is considered that documentation contained in the packages is not sufficient to determine if the changes are technically acceptable.
In all cases, the change package contained no 50.59 safety evaluation. The absence of a safety evaluation in does not mean that the change was not technically acceptable, however lack of such documentation and the associated evidence that various technical and regulatory issues were considered in making the change, renders the technical acceptability of the changes as indeterminate within the scope of review of the ICAVP. A discussion of each of the four (4) FSARCRs follows.
- 1. FSARCR 95-MP3-16 An Independent Safety Engineering Group (ISEG) report E92-010 identified in part, certain discrepancies in the UFSAR when compared to station procedures and practices. To resolve these discrepancies, the FSARCR changed the FSAR to remove a monthly check of the " chilled water control valves for movement and leaks." The FSARCR also changed a monthly testing frequency to quarterly for the Control Building air conditioning and ventilation systems not normally in use (standby) to be consistent with station practices. The FSARCR presents a brief justification for the deletions which states how valve movements and leaks are checked. However, the decision was apparently made not to describe such checks in the FSAR. The justification presented for changing the testing frequency from monthly to quarterly is to reflect the current station practice. There is also a statement 'No safety evaluation required" without supporting explanation. The FSARCR implements changes to procedures described in the SAR and therefore should have had a safety evaluation or refered to one performed for a corresponding procedure change (s), as applicable. The package does not document what the requirements are for testing from a design basis and/or regulatory compliance perspective. There is no evidence that other controlling documents such as SERs or licensing comittments were reviewed nor other documentation to definitively conclude (as stated on the form), that 'certain information in the FSAR....has been rendered incorrect..
- Printed 9/26,W 3.02:51 AM Page 1 of 2
Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR ND. DR MP3-0180 l
Milletone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- 2. FSARCR 92-MP3-35 A safety evaluation is not included in the package. Technical acceptability must consider the design and licensing basis requirements (not stated in the package) compared to the FSAR changes being implemented. it is not sufficient to state that the change, are Justified by the actual as-built condition and/or current surveillance practices of the plant without stating or providing other evidence that the as-built condition / surveillance practices are in accordance with design and licensing basis requirements.
3, FSARCR 89-MP3-9 Same explanation as item No. 2 above.
- 4. FSARCR 87 MP310 Same explanation as lem No. 2 above.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Navarro, Mark 8
0 0
S/2 5'S' VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J G
O O
8/18' VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K
l O
O
- a225, IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
S':5S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? O Yes @ No Review initiator: Navarro, Mark VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 9/2&97 9 02.57 AM Page 2 of 2
Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR N2, DR-MP3 0182 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Wview Group: System DR VALID Potential Operatety issue Discipline: Piping Design Ow Discrepancy Type: Calculation gg System / Process: SWP c
NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published; 9/29/97 Discrepancy: C'lscrepancy in ' confirmation required' status for stress analysis calculation NP(B)-X53902 Descripuon: in the process of review:ng the following documents, (1) Pipe Stress Analysis Calculation 12179-NP(B)-X53902, Rev.
1, CCN's 1 to 5 (ii) Pipe Stress Reconciliation isometric Drawing 12179-Cl-SWP-32A-4, Rev.12 (iii) Pipe Support Calculation 12179-NP(F).Z-7398-258, Rev. 2 we noted the following discrepancy:
Background:
Revision 1 of the pipe stress calculation (i) has two items that require confirmation.
The first item is assumption 2 on page 7. It is appropriately marked on the cover-sheet of the calculation, and has been confirmed in CCN No.1.
The second is the installation of a pipe support modification assumed in the pipe stress analysis. A lateral constant type (LC) pipe support is assumed at node point (NP) 117 of the 53902D piping model. Page B2 states that the installation of the assumed support modification requires confirmation. Page B56 Indicates that a support number for the support at NP 117 will be identified later. On page E12 it is stated that the new support at NP 117 is not installed. However, tnis confirmation required item has not been identified on the cover-sheet.
The requirement of a new support at NP 117 has not been addressed by the calculation change notices 1 through 5. A notice of confirmation removalis attached to the calculation. The notice states that confirmation requirements from the large bore pipe stress design calculation have been removed entirely. But the statment only addresses the first item. No mention is made of the second item.
According to (ii): The isometric shows a strut marked PSST-258 at the location corresponding to NP 117. The support PSST-258 has been designed and analyzed in (iii).
Discrepancy:
Printed 9/26/97 3:19:31 PM Page 1 of 2 l
l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2, DR-MP34182 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report in the pipe stress analysis calculation (1), the installation of PSST-258 support has not been confirmed.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Prakash, A.
O O
O or 2/97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
8/15S7 VT Mgr: Schepfer, Don K O
O O
se22/97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
o<2e<97 Date:
INVALID:
Dete:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 C) Yes @ No Review initiator: Prakash, A.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comn nts:
Printed 9/26<97 3:19:38 PM Page 2 of 2 V
Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3 0191 l
Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Pro 0rammatic DR VALID N*
^
Potential OperabilMy issue Disc 42ne: Othe' O Ya Discrepancy Type: Corrective Action gg System' Process: N/A NRC Significance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published: 9/2297 Discrepancy: Extent of condition determination ir, NCR 392-160 (Utton Veam Connectors) disposition.
Descripuon: NCR 392160, *Litton Veam Connectors (PIN CIR00M#-20A-9P[100]) Purchased under QA PO# 903570 without qualification documentation" is appropriately dispositioned "Use-As-Is" based on obtaining documentation verifying EEQ applicability. The Purchase Order did not identify the Environmental Qualification requirements for these devices. Although the disposition for these items was appropriately resolved, no apparent action has been identified with respect to determining whether or not a similar condition exists with other purchase orders as required by paragraph 6.2.2 of NEO 3.05, Rev,2. This paragraph states,"If the disposition corrects an inadequate design, then the disposition should include a requirement to change the design.
The disposition should also be evaluated to determine if information on the NCR should be identified on other documents or in other programs and actions should be taken for its incorporation (l.e., purchase order changes......)."
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Wrona, s. P.
B 0
0 st24s7 VT Leed: Ryan, Thornas J B
O O
9/24/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K G
O O
S25S7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
9/26/97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled by NU7 (.) Yes (!) No Review initiator: Wrona, S. P.
VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K
!RC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Pnnted RT6/97 3:20:17 PM Page 1 of 1
Northea'_t Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3-0194 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Confguratzn DR VALID Review Element: System instanaten p
Disc 6pline: Piping Design Om Discrepancy Type: InstaRation impiwnentation g
System / Process: QSS NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Walkdown Discrepancies of the QSS in the Containment
==
Description:==
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-71-5 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 Val 6d invalid Needed Date initiator: Reed, J. W.
O O
O S'11/97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A B
D 0
S/11/S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O Q
9/22/97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q
Q 9,"25/97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? () Yes @ No Review initiator: Reed, J. W.
VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Sin 0h, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 9/2697 9 o3.38 AM Page 1 of 1
{
Northe st Utilities ICAVP DR NL DR-MP3-0196 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Configuretkm DR VALID Potentia Ope bility issue p
Discrepancy Type: Dmwing
@~) No System / Precess: Oss NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: QSS/RSS Upper Tier to Lower Tier Drawing Discrepancies for Containment Bldg:
==
Description:==
The following drawing discrepancies were found in reviewing the PalD with the as built isometric drawings:
- 1. On Cl-OSS 30 Sht 6 Rev 15 safety related valve 3OSS*V979 as shown on P&lD EM-115A Rev 18 (L-7) should be designated with (*).
- 2. On Cl-QSS-30 Sht 10 Rev 15 safety related valve 3QSS*V978 as shown on P&lD EM-115A Rev 18 (L-8) should be designated with (*).
- 3. On Cl-RSS-504A Sht 5 Rev 5 safety related valves 3RSS*V950, *V991, and *V995 as shown on P&lD EM-115A Rev 18 (L-7) should be designated with (*),
- 4. On Cl-RSS-502B Sht 3 Rev 4 safety related valves 3RSS*V952, *V993, *V989, and 'V6 as shown on P&lD EM-115A Rev 18 (J-5) should be designated with (*).
- 5. On Cl-RSS-504B Sht 4 Rev 4 safety related valves 3RSS*V953,'V992, *V988, and *V3 as shown on P&lD EM-115A Rev 18 (L-4,L-5) should be designated with (*).
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Reed, J. W.
O O
O S/1 S7 VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A Q
Q 9/11/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O
O O
9/22/97 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
9/25/97 Date:
INVALIO:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identif.ed by NU7 O Yes @ No Review initiator: Reed, J. W.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
Printed 9/26/97 9.04:31 AM Page 1 of 1
l Northe st Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3-0202 Millstone unk 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmatic DR VALID 3
Potential Operability issue D6scipl6ne: Piping Design Ow Discrepancy Type: Corrective Achon (5) No System / Process: N/A
~
NRC SignlHeance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpancy: Insufficient Justification Provided in Nonconformance Report Package Dactl tion: NCR # 3-92-0269 dealt with some cracked lines in the P
Radioactive Waste Boron Recovery System The NCR states that metallurgical examination revealed that the cause was stress corrosion cracking. The disposition was to replace the cracked piping with piping fabicated from the same material and to make no design changes. No justification is provided for this disposition.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initlator: Shepperd R. P.
O O
O S/15S7 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J B
O O
S/15/S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
st22/97 BRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
ot2sto7 Dm.:
INVALID:
Date:
REs0LUTION Previously identifled by NU7 O Yes @ No Review A ce table Not Acceptable Needed Date gg, S 4 R. P.
VT Lead: P en, Thomas J f
VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Pnnted 9t26/97 9:06.17 AM Page 1 of 1
Northea:t Utilitie3 ICAVP DR NO. DR-MP3-0204 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmatic DR VALID Potentia bility issue Discrepancy Type: Corrective Acton
@) No System / Process: N/A
~
NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Publeshed: 9/2997 D6screpancy'. Incomplete Nonconformance Report Package Description 1. NCR # 3-91-0018 deals with weld Indications on the travelling screen wash piping welds. The pipng had pin hole leaks. In an attempt to remove the defects, a cavity of approximately 6 inches by 3 inches was opened in the piping. The disposition was to weld repair the cavity without determining the extent of the remaining linear indications and porosity. The NCR states:
"The defects probably exist throughout the circumference of the welds."
Quality Control was to note any remaining indications after weld repair for information only. The disposition states that the weld defects were caused by the manufacturer and that the piping had been in service for approximately three years. No further justification for the disposition was provided.
- 2. No safety evaluation, environmental evaluation, safety evaluation screening or environmental screening was found in the package.
- 3. Parts of the NCR package are difficult to read. This does not meet the requirements of NU's commitment to NRC Regulatory Guide 1.88.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: sheppard. R. P.
8 O
O S'15/S7 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J B
O O
S/15S7 VT Mgt: schopfer Don K G
O O
S'ZbS7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K G
O O
9/2e,97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identireed by NU? ( ) Yes @) No Review initiator: sheppard, R. P.
VT Leed: Ryan, Thomas J VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 9/26,97 3:21:03 PM Page 1 of i f
~ - - _ _ -. - _
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR MP3 n229 i
Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: Confoureten tevAuo Revlow Elonent: System installetkm Diecipune: I a c Desig" O vee Diecropency Types Insteheten implementaten
- 4) No Systerr#rocess: QSS NRC Sigrnconce level: 4 Date F Axed to NU:
Dele Published:
}
D6*cropency: Missing Equipment Tags D*ecription: The following installed components were found not to have identification tags:
1 instrument 30SS-FT328 i
Terminal box 3QSS-BP3A1 (attached to the QS6 Pump for connection of embedded thermo couples)
Review
[.
Val 6d invalid Needed Date initiator: Sarwr, T. L.
O O
O 8/12/S7 VT Leed: Neft, Anthony A Q
Q Q
9/1597 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
ar22/97 l
1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
at2s97 Dei.:
INVALID:
Date:
}
RESOLUTION:
Prevlorely identified by NU? O Yes
@) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date MW:
TL VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A i
VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K
)
lRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Dete:
SL Comments:
1 1
- Printed S'2697 9.13.25 AM Page 1 of 1 d
-~..,-
_.,m.-
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP34230 l
Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Contguretson DRVAUD Potential Operability issue Diecipline: I & C Design O Yes Discrepancy Type: Instalteten implementaten SystemProcess: RSS NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecropency: Missing Equipment Tags Deecription: The following installed ir.struments were found not to have identification tags: 3RSS PS41 A and B.
Review VelW Invalid Needed Date initiator: Server, T. L.
O O
O 9ei2/97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A
[
[
9/16/97 VT Mgt: Schopfer Don K g
Q Q
&72,97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O sus 7 Date:
th/ALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identitled by NU? (.) Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date M
S.
T. L VT Lead: Nort, Antley A VT Hgr: Schopfer, Do:, K IRC Chmn: SNh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
1 c
Pnnted 97.%97 9.14 32 AM Page 1 of 1
Northe st Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR44P3 0241 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: conngureton DR VAuD Review Element: Systern le maw 6on P
WIMy lsen 06eceptine: Electrical Desig" Ow D6ecrepancy Type: hetalletion Implementaten j
Systemfrocess: SWP NRC Sign 6ficance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecrepancy: in accurate Support Detall Drawings Doncription: E&DCR F E 15026 Indicates on page 5 that a piece of tirut has been installed by the field across the embeds that are used as part of tray support type G210 to support conduits. Page 6 shows this strut member as part of the support detall. The support detall drawing (12179-EE 34JG, Rev. 4) has been revised to incorporate the E&DCR but does not reflect the added member, Review Valid invalid Nooded Date initiator: Server T.L O
O O
8' SS7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A Q
O Q
9/16/97 VT Mgt: Schopfw, Don K O
O O
SrsS7 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q
O O
S'2597 Dese:
INVAUD:
Dele:
REsGLUTION:
Previously identified by NUP Q Yes
(#) ho
)
Review
^#***
^##
initiator: Sarvw, T. L VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K b
1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
Date:
SL Comments:
~
Printed 9/2697 9:1506 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0246 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: Confquraten DR VAll0 heview Element: System Instehetion Potentiel operability issue D6ecipl6ne: Electrical Desgn O vee Deseropency Type: IrstaWen implementeton
(#> No SystemProcess: SWP
~
NRC Signtnconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecrepency: Undocumented Structural Connections to Tray Supports
==
Description:==
Tray support F103-44 is shown on location drawing EE 34EV, Rev. 2 and detailed on drawing EE34HM, Rev. 2 as a four level
- C' channel support with the channels welded to embedded plates and a single tray mounted to the top of each member.
The top member of the support has an additional connection to a circular stair case support steel member running floor to ceiling.
This connection of the stalt support steelis not shown on ti,e drawing nor !ncluded in any outstanding change documents for the drawing, Review Valid invalid Needed Date initietor: Server, T. L O
O O
S/tSS7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
S/157 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
a22/s7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anend K O
O O
a2ss7 Deie:
INVAll0:
Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identif6ed by Nur O Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Cote M
TL VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
Printed a2597 9:15 46 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0247 Millstone UnN 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew oroup: Confguraten DR VALIO Potential Operabil6ty issue Diecipl6ne: Electrical Design O vn D6screpancy Type: Drawing (G) No SystemProcess: SWP NRC Signifnconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Publisted:
06screpancy: Difference in Material Type Between TS02 and Conduit Support Log Descript6on: Conduits 3CC931PA2 and 3CC931PA3 are shown on Conduit Support Log 12179-FSK AB-2237 Rev.3A as rigid steel, TSO2 shows these as rigid Aluminum.
Review Valid inval6d Needed Date in6tletor: Server, T. L.
0 0
S'17/87 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
o<ia,S7 O
O or22ro7 VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Sngh, Anand K O
O O
8'zS7 Date:
INVAll0:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously ident6fted by NU7 (,) Yes it) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date 7
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Sctopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Detel SL Comments:
Printed 9/26,97 9.16.48 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3-0248 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Conrguration DR VALID Poterdial OperabilNy issue Diecipline: Electrical Des 6pn O ve.
Discrepancy Type: Drew 6ng (4) No systemProcess: SWP NRC significence level: 4 Date faxed Io NU:
Date Published:
D'screpency: Conduit not Shown on Support Detail Drawing Deectlpt6on:
- 1. The Cable and Raceway program (TSO2) indicates that conduit 3CX502NG is supported from support CB-558. This support is shown on Conduit Support Log 12179-FSK CB 558 Rev. 4. This CSL falls to include the subject condult.
- 2. The Cable and Raceway program (TSO2) indicates that conduit 3CX956PA is supported from support CB-6128. This support is shown on Conduit Support Log 12179-FSK CB-6128 Rev. 9E. This CSL includes conduit 3CC956PA, but r71 3CX956PA.
Review Val 6d inval6d Needed Date initiator: server T. L.
O O
O S/17/97 VT Leed: Nut, Anthony A O
O O
S/*S7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O
O O
S 22/97 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
92597 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identitled by NU? (.) Yes iti No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date b
T. L VT Leed: Nori. Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K g
O IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
sL Conenents:
Printed &7697 9:17:24 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0249 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Confguretion DR VALID Revlew Element: System Dee499 Potent 6al Operabilny les Diecipime: Electrical Design O Yee Discrepancy Type: Installation Requiremente re, y, systerrVProcess: $WP NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Dele PtMiehed:
Discrepancy: Missing Support Details D. ctlpelon: Tray support location drawing 12179-EE 34EX. Rev,5 calls for detall types D102A, D202A, D104A, and D204A, This drawing Indicates via tabulation that detail drawings for these supports are on drawing 12179-EE 34HR. Rev,4. Rev;ew of this document and its open change documents did not reveal details for these support types.
Review Val 6d invalld Needed Date initiator: barver, T. L Q
Q O
9/14S7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
S'1557 VT Mge: Schopfer Don K O
O O
8/22/97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
S':sS7 Dei.:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yee ? No Review initiator: Sarvw, T. L VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 9/2697 9:17.55 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0251 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revlow Group: Confguraton DR VALID Potent 6el Operabillty issue 06ecipl4ne: Electrical Dee$n O Ya Discrepency Type: Instenstbn implementation SysterWProceos: SWP NRC Signifnconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecropency: Missing Raceway identification Tags Deecript6an: Two risers located on the north wall, east end of the DG B i
building, behind panel 3EGS*PNLB, do not have tray identification tags. (Based on EE 34TC Rev.1, these appear to be 3TXS62N and 3TK666N), Installation Specification EE 350 indicates all raceways are to be marked.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date O
S'i4S7 Inillator: Server, T. L.
]
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A 0
0 S'15S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
n22/97 IRC Chmn: S6ngh, Anand K O
O O
S?5/97 Dei.:
INVAL8D:
Date:
REbOLUTION:
)
Previously identitled by NU7 C.) Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date 3,
VT Leed: Nort, Anthory A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Sin 0h, Anand K O
O Dele:
SL Comments:
4 4
1 Printed &'2697 9:18:29 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utliities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0262 Millstone Unk 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Contguraten DR VALID Review Flament: System InsteWon p,,g
,giny,,,
g Diecipline: Electrical Desgn O Yes Diocrapency Type: Installeton imp 4ementeten (G) No SystemProcoes: SWP
'~
NRC Significance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Putdished:
Diecr*Pency: Field installation does not match drawing Deecription: Conduit Support Logs 12179-FSK DG-087, Rev. 2A and 12179 FSK DG-066, Rev. 3B indicate that supports DG 087 and DG-086 are two feet apart in elevation (32' and 34'). The installed configuration condition does not agree with the above drawings.
The installed support spacing is a minimum of 4 feet.
Review Valid invalid Nooded Date initletor: Server, T. L O
O O
S/17/S7 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
S'it'S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
S22'S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
S' 5S7 Date:
INVAUD:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously *.dentifled by NU7 O Yes (9) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date Mw: Swvw, T. L VT Lead: Nori, Anthony A O
O VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K SL Conwnents:
Printed 9/2697 9:19 30 AM Phi of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0263 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Progrernmatic DR VALID Review Element: CorrectNo Action Process p
Diecipline: Other ypp Discrepancy Type: ConectNe Acton
$ No System /Procoes: DGX NRC s6gntAconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: &7297 Diecrepency: Inaccurate Data incorporated into the Corrective Action of ACR
- MS 96-0268
==
Description:==
The Adverse Condition description (Block 2 of Form RP 41) references UIR # 221 (part of the ACR # M3 96-0268) which lists 12 VSRT suggestions and questions with respect to the MP3 FSAR. Item #1 of these VSRT suggestions and questions reads as follows:
- Figure 8.310, Sheets 13 / EGD 160 hour0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> and 30 min, ratings are shown incorrectly. SUGGESTION: Show 160 hour0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> rating as 5486 kW and 30 min. rating as 5983 kW.*
The Recommended Corrective Action (Block 6 of Form RP 4 7, Page 3 ) addresses item #1 as follows :
'FSAR Figure 8.3-10, Sheets 13: FSARCR will be issued to revise the EGD 160 hour0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> and 30 min, ratings to 5436 kW and 5983 kW respectively. DCN DM3-00-0149 97 will be issued to revise Drawing 39241, Sheet 189 which is designated as Figure 8.310, Sheet 1 of the FSAR' Note: The Recommended Corrective Action 160 hour0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> rating was inaccurately copied as 5436 kW instead of 5486 kW from the UIR #221. The 160 hour0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> kW rating of the EGD is conservative but stillineccurate.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Caruso, A.
O O
O o'15S7 VT Leed: Ryen, Thornes J G
O O
S'15S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
a?2Sr IRC Chmn: S6ngh, Anord K O
O O
S2SS7 Date:
INVAL10:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identined by NU7 (,) Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Leed: Ryen, Thomas J VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chrnn: Singh Anand K Date:
11 f'nerunanf a*
Printed S?697 3 21:57 PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2, DR MP3 0253 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report i
Printed &"2S97 3.22:02 PM Page 2 of 2 l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0269 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR VALID Review Element: system Design Potential operabilsty lasue Discipline: Piping Design O Yes Discrepency Type: Calculaton (e) No tysterrvProcess: SWP NRc Significance level: 3 Date Faxed to NU:
Dele Published: Ev2997 Discrepancy: Load combination discrepancy in the computation of Normal / Upset and Faulted stresses
==
Description:==
In the process of reviewing the following documents, (i) FSAR Section 3.98.1.4.1 Loading Conditions (ii) FSAR Table 3.9B 11 Load Combinations for ASME Class 2 and 3 Piping (ill) Pipe Stress Analysis Criteria Document, NETM 44, Revision 2
(iv) Pipe Stress Calculation 12179-NP(B) X53901, Rev. 6, CCH's i
i to 3 (v) Pipe Stress Calculation 12179-NP(B) X53900, Rev. 5 we noted the following discrepancy:
Background:
4 According to (1): The structural stress analyses performed for Selsmic Category i ASME Code Class 1,2, and 3 piping consider the loading and load combinations specified in Table 3.9811 (ii).
According to (ii), the normal / upset and faulted plant operating conditions ASME Ill Subsection NC Equation's 9N/U and 9F, Include loads resulting from seismic loads and occasional loads other than seismic, i.e. fluid transients. However, no guidance is provided on the combination of moments for the different loading
(
conditions.
l For Class 2 and 3 piping, the same table (ii) is repeated as Table 1
4-6 of (iii). Here also, no guidance is provided on the combination of moments for the different loading conditions. For Class i systems, Section 4.1.4.3 of (111) provides procedures for combining moments due to different loading conditions. The procedure states that "if two or more Independent occasional dynamic load cases act simultaneously and need to be r
combined, this is done by square-root-of-sum-of squares l
(SRSS). In the case of time history dynamic cases, the moment l
components utilized are those which produce the maximum resultant moment".
The above stated moment combinations are fonned in (iv) as follows:
S(seismic) = S(eq. 9) S(eq. 8)
S(eq. 9 total) = [S(seismic)^2 + S(timehlstory)^2]^0.5 + S(eq. 8)
Here, S represents the stress level, and eq.'s 8 & 9 refer to the Printed 9/2697 3.22:36 PM Page 1 of 2
~
Nodneast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR MP3-0259 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report ASME lil-NC code equations, in (v) the moment combinations are formed as follows:
S(eg,9 total) = [S(eq. 9)^2 + S(timehlstory)^2)^0.5 This is inconsistent wit!: the above procedure, and is un-conservative.
Discrepancy:
i In pipe stress calculation (v) the procedure used for combining i
seismic and fluid-transient induced moments is not consistent with the design criteria, and is un conservative, Review Vei6d invalid Needed Date initiator: Prakash, A.
O O
O 8/16S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
9/iss7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
o/22/or IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
W26/97 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
PreYlously identifled by NU7 O Yet to) No I
Review l
initiator: Prakash, A.
O O
O VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 1RC Clwnn: Singh, Anand K
- e:
j SL Comments:
l i
r l
t l
Pnnted 9/2697 3.22:44 PM Page 2 of 2 l
r
Northeast Utillfjes ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0260 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: con ourston DR VAUD r
Review Element: system Doogn Potentiel Operability issue Diecipline: Piping Doolgn Q w.
Discrepancy Type: Drawing 4 No SystwrWProcus: sWP NRC Significence level: 4 Dele faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepency: Upper tier to Lower Tier Drawing Inconsistencies for SWP in Auxiliary Bldg.
==
Description:==
The following drawing discrepancies were found in reviewing the P&lD with the as built IJometrics:
- 1. On Cl SWP 22 Sht 4 Rev 8 safety related valves 3SWP*V972, 'V198, 'V973,*V29(*MOV71 A), 'V62(*MOV718),
and *V199 and instruments *PS69A, *PS70A, *PS698, and
- PS708 as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (C-6,7,8) should be designated with an (*).
- 2. On Cl SWP 22 Sht 4 Rev 8 the continuation line 3-SWP 030-56 3 should be 3 SWP 018 99 3 per the isometric drawing itself and P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (D-8).
- 3. On Cl-SWP 95 Sht 4 Rev 10 line 3 SWP 030 396 3 is called out.This line is not on P&lD EM-133B Rev 34.
- 4. On Cl SWP 95 Sht 4 Rev 10 flow element 3SWP* FE43B as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (G 5) should be designated with a (*).
- 5. On Cl SWP 23 Sht 6 Rev6 safety related valves 3SWP*V316,
- V209, 'V317, *V208, 'V315, and 'V207 as shown on P&lD EM.
133B Rev 34 (F 5, F 6, F 7 E 5,E 6,E 7) should be designated with a (*).
- 6. On Cl SWP 23 Sht 5 Rev 7 safety related valves 3SWP*V70,
- V71, 'V40, 'V41, *V67, 'V66,*V39, 'V38, 'V35, *V34, 'V212,
'V221, *V211, 'V220, *V210, and *V219 es shown on P&lD EM.
1330 Rev 34 should be designated with a (*).
- 7. On Cl SWP 158 Sht 4 Rev 6 safety related valve 3SWP*MOV130B (*V875) and restricting orifice 3SWP*RO133B as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (G 2) should be designated with a (*).
- 8. On Cl SWP 158 Sht 5 Rev 6 safety related valve 3SWP*V808 as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (F 2) should be designated with a (*)
- 9. On Cl SWP-16 Sht 5 Rev 7 safety related valve 3SWP*V700 as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (D-9) should be designated with a (*).
- 10. On Cl-SWP 24S Sht 5 Rev 9 safety related valves 3SWP*V65, 'V66, *V68, 'V69, 'V33, *V34,*V36, and*V37 as Printed 9/2tV97 9 20.13 AM Pege 1 of 2 1
Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP34260 Millstone Unk 3 Discrepancy Report shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (D-4 to D-8) should be designated with a (*),
- 11. On Cl SWP 56 Sht 3 Rev 11 the drawing Continuation line 3 SWP-004102 3 should be ')-SWP 004-405 3, 12, on Cl SWP 149 Sht 3 Rev 7 safety related restricting orifice 3SWP*RO133A as shown on PalD EM 133B Rev 34 (G 10) should be designated with a ('),
13, On Cl SWP 97 Sht 4 Rev 9 safety related flow element 3SWP*FE43A as shown on PalD EM 1333 Rev 34 (F 6) should be designated with a (*),
Review Valid kivalid Needed Date Initiator: Reed, J. W.
O O
O 9/1&97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q
Q Q
S?197 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
$25S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
S/2557 D.te:
INVALID:
Date:
Rf SOLUTION:
Previously identined by NUf Q Yes (9) No Review inittatort Road, J.W.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
D.i.:
SL Comments:
Printed S'269710 34 48 AM Page 2 oI2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3 0242 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: Conrguratm DR VA1.1D Revhw Element: System instehete pg,gg
,gy gg, Diecipl6ne: Poin0 D'*'90 Q yn D6ecrepancy Type: Installstu impeementate (e)
SystemProcess: SWP
~ No NRC Significance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Publistwd:
06screpency: Walkdown discrepancies for the SWP in the Auxiliary Building Dacription: The following discrepancy items were found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the Auxillary Building:
- 1. Instrument line 3SWP PDl 164B shown on isometric EK-512177 Rev i does not have a 1 in offset in the tubing at the second bend from valve 3SWP*V868 as shown on the drawing.
- 2. Instrument line 3SWP*PS69B is missing support H002 (BZ.
612A 130) shown on isometric drawing EK 512023.
- 3. Restricting orifice 3SWP*RO121B has no NU component tag.
- 4. Lines 3 SWP 030-165-3 and 3-SWP-030166 3 have abandoned welded support attachments on their end caps that are not called out on isometric drawing 3-SWP 23 Sht 5 Rev 7.
- 5. Lines 3-SWP 004-404 3 and 3 SWP 004 405 3 are insulated but not required by Spec. SP ME-691.
- 6. Vent and drain lines with valves 3SWP*V818, 'V814, and
'V815 are capped which is not as shown on drawing CP 319712 Sht 3 Rev7 and PalD EM 133B Rev 34.
- 7. Valve SSWP*MOV71 A (*V29) has insulation missing and no Work in Progress tag visible in the area.
- 8. Line 3-SWP 150103 3 insulation as required by spec is missing.
- 9. Line 3 SWP 150-104 3 insulation as required by spec is missing.
- 10. Line 3-SWP-003150 3 has about a 2 ft. section of insulation missing.
- 11. Lire 3-SWP 003-365 3 has about a 4 ft. section of insulation missing.
- 12. Line 3-SWP-150105 3 has no insulation as required by spec.
- 13. Line 3-SWP 150-106-3 has no insulation as required by spec.
The following material condition items were found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the Auxiliary Building:
Printed W2697 9 2100 AM Page 1 of 2 4
_. ~ _ _ _,.
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR NO, DR MP3 0242 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- 1. Valves 3SWP*V70, 'V71, 'V40, and *V41 packing shows leakage and the flange bolts are rusted.
- 2. Valve 3SWP*V64 packing shows leakage.
- 3. Valve 3SWP*V668 packing shows leakage.
- 4. Restricting orifice 3SWP'RO121 A has no NU component tag and insulation at its flange is damaged.
- 5. Flow element 3SWP*FE43A insulation is damaged.
- 6. Valve 3SWP*V857 packing shows leakage,
- 7. Valve 3SWP*V853 packing shows leakage.
- 8. Valve 3SWP*V972 bolts are rusted.
- 9. The connection of the instrument valve 3SWP*V207 line to line 3 SWP 024 304 3 shows leakage.
Review j
Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Reed, J. W.
O O
O S/16S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
S'1657 VT Mge: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
m22/87 1RC Chmn: Sin 0h, Anand K O
O O
- ?5'87 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identined py NU? C) Yes t No 1
Review inittetor: Reed, J. W.
VT Lead: Neri, Anttey A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O Date:
SL Comments:
i 1
Einted 9'2697 9:21:06 AM Pope 2 of 2 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0274 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: System DR VALID A'*
E M'*
Poteedial operabiltty issue Diecipl6ne: Structurel Des $n O Ya D6eciopency Type: calculeHon
(#) No System 9tocess: SWP NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6*croPency: Pipe Support Design DiscrepanClos
==
Description:==
We have reviewed STRUDL Computer Run for Pipe Support Calculation no.NP(F)-ZO19R 014 H002,ReV,7. Based upon the results of this review,the following discrepancies were noted:
On page 11, shear stresses in Y and Z direction should be 371.8 psi (not 198 psi) and 50 psi (not 57 psi) respectively ( see page 14 of STRUDL Run).
On page 13, force F1 = 44 lbs corresponds to joint 3(not joint 7) and force F2 = 668.293# (not 484#).See reference page 15 of STRUDL Run.
On page 19, force Fxn = 44 lbs at joint 3 (not joint 7), Moment Mxn = 802.233 in-lbs (not 1553 in-lbs) and Myn = 1394.13 in lbs ( not 419 in-lbs ).See reference page 15 of STRUDL Run, Review Valid invalid Needed Dale init6ator: Kleic, N O
O O
S/1SS7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
SSS7 VT Mge: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
E22/97 IRC Chmn: Sangh, Anand K O
O O
S'25S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously iderdified by NU7 () Yes (e) No Review A optable Not Acceptable Needed Date 14 N
O O
O VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Commerds:
f Frinted E'2697 921:44 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0031 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmatic DR INVALeo Review Element: Correettvo Action Process p
Diecipl6ne: Mechanical Design O va D6ecrepency Type: Corrective Action W No System / Process: RSs NRc signinconce level: 4 Date F Axed to NU:
Date Published.:
D6.crepency: Corrective Action Plan to Address Fouling Factor issue D*ecr6pelon: The documentation included with ACR M3-96-0294 corrective action does not address TEMA Requirements which were part of original design basis nor adequately specify FSAR sections potentially affected.
Different fouling factors were used in calculations for heat transfer of RSS heat exchangers. The calculations indicate 0.000 tube side fouling factor assumed while the FSAR Indicates
.0005. This issue was also subsequently reported on ACR M3 0364 Indicating that a "possible non-conservative " fouling factor was used, however ACR M3-96-0354 was later closed to ACR M3 96-0294.
A. The ACR planned corrective action does not contain evidence that TEMA requirements would be considered. (Ref. note 3 below).
B. Heat Exchanger performance testing procedures may also be impacted. Affected procedures should be specified for review as part of corrective action.
C. Although the planned corrective action includes the necessity of an FSARCR for clarification, the ACR documentation only refers generally to " Chapter 15 analysis and Containment Analysis" No mention is made of potentialImpact to FSAR page 6.2 44 (indicated in UIR 513 which is referenced in related ACR M3 96-0354 which was closed to this ACR). To document the FSAR sections which are potentially affected, the sections and page numbers, as applicable, should be indicated in the corrective action section of the ACR.
D. Planned corrective action includes update to the MP3 Service Water Design Basis Summary Report, however, no mention is made of potential update to DBDP (MP3 SWP) Table 3.1 1 and note 10 thereof. Review and maintenance of the DBDPs is inferred in the CMP. If it is NUs intent not to update the DBDPs, please include an explanation as part of the response to this DR.
Notes:
- 1. The potential operability issue checked "no" above is only with respect to the current plant shutdown / cooled down condition. The box would be checked "yes"if the plant was in a mode which required RSS to be operable.
Printed &?S97 e.52:15 AM Page 1 of 3
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2, DR MP3-0031 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- 2. The 9/9/99 indicated due date for corrective action completion in the ACR is taken to be insignificant on the basis that the actions will be completed prior to the plant entering a mode where RSS is required to be operable.
- 3. Referenec TEMA 1968 Edition, Section 9, para. T 2.4 Review ValW InvalW Needed Date initiator: Neverro, Mark O
O O
222/97 VT l. sed: Ryan, Thomas J O
O O
S24S7 i
VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K O
O O
IRC chmn: singh. Anand K O
O O
oste:
9/22/97 WVAllo: Based on further review of the processes (eg. Calc. revision, FSAR revision) which would be implemented to complete the corrective action plan, it was subsequently determined that the concems listed in items A,B,C and D would be addressed as follows:
i Foritem A, the analysis called forin the corrective action plan would be performed in accordance with the Design Control Manual, Chapter 5 (Calculations). Chapter 5 requires design a
venfication be performed per Chapter 4 (Design Verification) which includes verification that the proper codes and standards (eg. TEMA) be considered.
For item B, Chapter 4 and NUC DCM form 5-1 A both require consideration of the affects on procedures, therefore the process has controls to ensure potential changes to heat exchanger performance tests would be identified.
For item C, Chapter 5 of the DCM requires that affected sections of the FSAR be identified, therefore this concem would be addressed.
For item D, Chapter 4 of the DCM, specifically NUC Form 41E requires consideration of the effects to the DBDPs, therefore this concem would be addressed.
In addition, clarification has been provided to address Notes 1 and 2 as follows:
For Note 1: S&L has revised Project Instructions to provide clarification on what plant modes of operation are applicable when making the determination of " potential operability issue" when a DR is initiated.
For Note 2: Supplementary information has been provided to assure that completion of the ACR corrective action plan will occur prior to the plant entering a mode in which the associated components are required to be operable.
Based on the above, this DR has been re statused as INVAllD.
Printed 97697 8 s2:20 AM Page 2 of 3
Northezt Utilities ICAVP DR N. DR MP3-0031 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report N o:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes
'Gi No Review C#8 M kc$aW Needed he initiator: Neverro, Mark O
O O
VT Leed: Ryan, Thomas J O
O O
VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O
O IRC Chmn: S@, Anand K Date:
SL Conwnents:
.1 Printed 9/2697 6.5223 AM p,g,3,, 3
Northe st Utilities ICAVP DR ND. DR-MP3-0164 Millston UnN 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DRINVALID Discipl6ne: Mechanical Design Potential Operabihty lasue Ow Discrepancy Type: Calculation (G) No tyetenVProcees: QSS NRC SigrWficance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecroPency: Minimum Wall Calculations Reference the FSKs for Design Temperature and Pressure
==
Description:==
The minimum wall calculations reference the flow diagrams (FSKs) for the design temperature and pressure of the lines.
The FSKs are For information Only" documents and are supeiseded by the piping diagrams and the line list. The design pressure and temperature used in Calculation MW(F)-45 are different from the values in the line list.
MW(F) 45 Line List Pressure 60 40 Temperature 150 140 Review VeHd invahd Needed Date initiator: Langel, D.
O O
O S2'S7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
S22S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
BRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
Date:
9/23/97 INVALIO: The values used in the calculation are higher than the values in the line list and therefore yleid conservative min wall results.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled by NU? C) Yes (4) No Review initiator: Langel, D.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A b
VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Dett.
SL Comments:
Printed 9/2697 8.59.14 AM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP35209 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR liNALID Potential Operability issue Dioc6pl6ne: I & C Design Ow Discrepancy Type: Drawing j
Syst6trVProcese: Os3 NRC Significence level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 9/2997 Discrepency: Drawing Discrepancy LSK 2712E Descrisdion: On Logic Drawing LSK 2712E, Rev 14, the condition description associated with source '49X", which is a thermal relay, should be changed from *SW 3QSS*MOV34A Molded Case Circuit Breaker Open" to "30SS*MOV34A Molded Case Circuit Breaker Open" to be consistent with the function of the source.
The condition description associated with source '74", which is an alarm relay, should be changed from "SW 3HVQ' ACUS 1 A Molded Case Circuit Breaker Open" to *3HVQ' ACUS 1 A Molded Case Circuit Breaker Open" to be consistent with the function of the source.
The r otation adjacent to condition description associated with source SOSS*LSS6A,'Any MCC Load Power Not Available" should be deleted, it is not associated with the condition of the source, whie.h is a level switch, Review Valid inval6d Needed Date innistor: Pinetes, H.
O O
O S/25S7 VT Lead: Nori, Anthony A O
Q 9/2sf97 VT Mgr Schopfer, Don K O
O O
l 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
Date:
9/25/97 INVALID: The identified condition is a typographical error which cannot j
lead to misinterpretation of the drawing.
l Date:
RESOLUTION:
l Previously identified by NU7 () Yes te! No
~
Review
^##'
initiator: Pineles, H.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K sL Comments:
Printed 9/2697 3.23:38 PM Pope 1 of 1
9 Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0215 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR INVALl0 Potential Operability issue Discipline: I & C Des %n O vee Discrepancy Typ: Drawing 4~ g SystemProcess: OsS NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NO:
Date Published: EW97 Discrepancy: Drawing Discrepancy. Schematics 3QSS-9301,2 931 1.2 Descrigdlon: Designation for Signal Converter SQSS*LY.931 A(XW) on Loop Schematic 3QSS-930-2, ReV 2 is inconsistent with the designation in PDDS. The designation should be changed to 4
QSS*LY931 A(XW) for consistency with the component numbering scheme.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initietor: Pineles. H.
O O
O
$5S7 VT Lead: Nort, Ardhony A O
O Q
9/25/97 j
VT Mgr: Schopfw. Don K O
O O
lRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K Q
Q Q
Date:
9/25/97 INVALID: The identified condition is a typographical error which will not result in misinterpretation of technical data.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes lei No Review initiator: P wles. H.
O O
O VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K
-e SL Comments:
i l
I I
l l
Printed 9/2697 3.24 22 PM Page 1 of 1
e Northeast Utikties ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0218 Ellistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DRINVALID Review Element: System Design Potential Operabiitty issue Discipl6ne: I & C Deongn Q y,,
Discrepancy Type: Drawing (9)No SystemProcess: RSS NRC $$1f6cence level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: E7&97 D6screpancy: Drawing Discrepancy. LSK 2711C Deecript6on: *(Note 3)* on Logic Diagram LSK 2711C, Rev 9 is shown under PB1 SR,3RSS*MV8837A Close Control Action;
- Note 2" refers to " Control for Cross Connect Valve 3RSS*MV8837A..."; adding
"(Note 3)* under 3RSS*MV8838A escutcheon would appear to be appropriate.
Escutcheons for 3RSS*MOV20A and 3RSS*MV8837A do not contain the unit number in the valve identifier.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Pinetes, H.
O O
O S2SS7 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
S/ 5S7 VT Mor: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
Date:
9/25/97 INVALID: The conditions identified in the DR are editorial errors. Those type of errors will be documented and tracked in the review checklists. Conclusions will be described in the final report.
Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by Nu? (.) Yee
(#> No Review initletor: Pinetes, H.
VT Lead: Nori, Anthony A 2
VT Mgt: Schopfer Don K l
lRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K
- e.
SL Comments:
d Printed 97S97 3:25:12 PM Page 1 of 1
c Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR4AP3-0222 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DRINVALIO Potordial Opereb666ty issue Diecipfme: I & C Design Ow Discrepency Type: Drawing SysterrvProcess: RSS NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Descrepency: Drawing Ciscrepancy Schematics 3RSS-021 A,B Descr6pt6on: Cable pair designation not identified for Cable 3CESNNX278 on sheets 3RSS-021 A and 0218, Rev6ew Val 6d invalid Needed Date inillator: Paneles, H.
O O
O S2'S7 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A
[
g Q
G7497 VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K O
O O
IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
i Date:
9/18/97 INVALID: Cable pair designation was not identified for Cable 3CESNNX278 on sheets 3RSS-021 A and 021B, however the cable has a plug connector with uniquely identified terminals, Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NUF (.) Yee lei No Review initletor: Pineles, H.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K
- e:
SL Conwnents:
Printed 9/2697 9:12:32 AM Page 1 of 1
.,-