ML20216D865
| ML20216D865 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/05/1997 |
| From: | Schopfer D SARGENT & LUNDY, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 9583-100, NUDOCS 9709090441 | |
| Download: ML20216D865 (5) | |
Text
"
?
y, m
Bar'sety}diLundy"c
}
/
Den K. $thoplet vu nnent 31N69-t 078 September 5,1997 Project No. 9583100 l
Docket No. 50-423 Northeast Nuclear Energy Compimy Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Independent Corrective Action Verification Program United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Docunwnt Control Desk
' Washington, D.C. 20$55 As required by the Conununications Protocol Pl MP3-01, Sargent & Lundy is responsible for providing meeting summaries for those public meetings in which its personnel are participants. Enclosed for your use are the meeting summaries for the NRC Staff / S&L meeting held on August 7,1997 and the NRC Staff /NU/S&L meetings held on August 12,1997, August 13,1997, and September 3,1997. The slides from the status meetings on August 12 and September 3 are not enclosed, since NU, NEAC and the NRC
' l, ave received copics of these presiously.
You may direct any questions to me at (312) 269 6078.
Yours very truly,
)
DJ D.K.Sch fer Vice President and ICAVP Manager q\\ )DI Copics:
- E. Imbro (1/1/4) Deputy Director, ICAVP Oversight
\\
- T, Concannon (1/1/0) Nuclear Energy Advisory Council g
J. Fougere (1/1/l) NU -
B. A. Erler (1/1/0)
Mh1%WorWR0905 A. Doc 9709090441 970905 ?
l(lll ll l)) g ll DR ADOCK 050 3
55 East Montce Street
- Chicago, IL 60603 5780 USA + 312 269-2000
c 4e Meeting Summary Millstone Unit 31CAYP Nuclear Regulatory Commission /Sargent & Lundy August 7 (p.m.),1997 PURPOSEt This meeting was held to discuss the proposed boundary definitions developed by S&L for the second group of systems selected for the Millstone Unit 3 ICAVP.
This meeting was open to the public for observation.
LOCATION: NRC Offices, Washington, D.C.
SUMMARY
OF DISCUSSION:
L Sargent & Lundy described their understanding of the scope of the ORO review Key points are summarized below:
a.
The review of operating procedures will verify the desip and licensing basis requirements are translated into the operating procedures. The review is not intended to include a line by line review of the procedures but only a review of sufficient detail to ensure the requirements from the design and licensing basis are satisfied. As part of this review, S&L will resiew valve and electricallineups associated with the operating procedures. S&L will also verify that instrumentation and controls are consistent withthe installed condition, that support system procedures address support of the Tier 1 systems, and that any manual operator actions for emergency conditions can physically be implemented.
'4.
The review of maintenance procedures will focus on key system components. In general, this includes componer'ts of the system which are required to perform a safety related active function. For these components, S&L's review will be as
' described in Section 4.5.b of the Audit Plan.
3f The review of test and surveillance procedures will be as described in Section 4.5.c of the Audit Plan. The review of test and surveillance procedures will focus or.
{
verifying that the design and licensing basis has been translated into the procedures and not that the test sequence is adequate,
. 4.
Meeting Summary I
Millstone Unit 3 ICAVP Nuclear Regulatory Commission /Nortbesst Utilities /Sargent & Lundy August 12,1997 9:00 a.m.
PURPOSE: 'Ihis meeting was held to provide Northeast Utilities and the NRC staffwith the status of the ICAVP on Millstone Unit 3 (Parsons Power provided a similar status on Unit 2 which may be found at their website.) His meeting was open to the public for observation only.
LOCATION: NU Training and Simulator Building at Millstone Site; Waterford, CT,
SUMMARY
OF DISCUSSION:
ne S&L ICAVP Manager reviewed the S&L approach to the three tiered review and identified the S&L grouping ofthe filleen (15) systems selected for the Tier i review, lie presented the scope ofeach Tier and what had been completed to date compared to the total scope of the review, lie also presented a summary of the discrepancy repons that had been initiated and issued as of that time, S&L stated that the overall schedule for the Unit 3 ICAVP was under internal review and would be issued to the NRC and NU within a few days. S&L indicated that additional resources were -
being added to the project based on the 11 additional systems chosen for the Tier I review at the NEAC Meeting on July 17,1997 The complete set of S&L slides from this presentation is attached to this summary.
4 re e-y%-a e-.
'wu.a g.
s.
--e ee-e y y y,
y ag m.--w#
M
- T'-"*+FT
o,.
4".
Meeting Summary Millstone Unit 3 ICAVP Nuclear Regulatory Commission / Northeast Utilities /Sargent & Lundy August 13 (4 p.m.),1997 PURPOSE: This meeting was held to discuss the ability for S&L to access the NU database on UIRs and ACR/CRs after $ 27 97.
i LOCATION: Millstone Training and Simuletor Building, Waterford, CT SUMMARf 0F DISCUSSION:
l.
S&L identified that they needed the most recent NU database and information about UIRs and ACR/CRa, including data aAer 5 27 97. NU has not provided this i
L infonnation because of the cutoff date for the Tier 1 system review. S&L L
acknowledged that the cutoff date for information related to Tier i raiew (discovery) was $ 27 97; however, S&L needs the information related to the i
corrective action documents after 5 27 97 for the Tier 3 review. NRC agreed that NU should prmide the database information t S&I. NU agreed to submit the
- electronic copy of the database the next day. S&L would prepare and submit an RFI for documentstion purposes.
I 2.-
S&L proposed that the S&L review ofcorrective action documents for the
)
selected systems be limited to UIRs and ACR/CRs. His_would eliminate the Open g
i Item Reports (OIRs) and Trouble Reports (TRs) from the scope of the rmiew, De basis for this was that OIRs are the documentation ofthe resuhs from NU PI-17 review that compared the FSAR testing requirements with the actual testing and surveillance procedures. S&L stated that this review aspect would be covered l
by the S&L ORG raiew and does not need to be repeated in the S&L PRO review; The NRC staff agreed with this position.
Trouble Reports reflect material condition issucs and are not considered part of the configuration management process.- NRC agreed with this position and agreed
. that TRs do not need to be reviewed in the ICAVP process.
1
e e ".
Meeting Summary Millstone Unit 3 ICAVP Nuclear Regulatory Commission / Northeast Utilities /Sargent & Lundy September 3,199710:30 a.m.
PURPOSE: His meeting was held to provide Northeast Utilities and the NRC staffwith the status of the ICAVP on Millstone Unit 3. His meeting was open to the public for observation only.
LOCATION: NU Training and Simulator Building at Millstone Site; Waterford, CT.
I s
SUMMARY
OF DISCUSSION:
ne S&L ICAVP Manager provided a summary presentation on the status of the Unit 31CAVP for each of the three Tiers of the review. The S&L schedule for completion of the review was diwussed. His schedule was revised on August 18,1997 and forecams completion of ths Tier 2 and Tier 3 discovery by September 26,1997; no Tier 1 review for the first two systems is also forecast for completion )y September 26. He remaining systems for Tier 1 is forecast to complete discovery by October 24,1997, ne overall program was estimated to be approximately 44% complete.
NU, NRC and S&L also discussed the discrepancy report (DR) process, including the NU response to the DRs and the S&L review of the NU response. S&L stated that the Significance Level of the DRs may change aRet the NU response has been received and reviewed by S&L.
S&L also noted that if the discrepant condition had already been identi6ed by NU, the DR would no longer be considered a "ve ified" discrepancy. S&L presented a summary of the DRs issued to date and those currently in process, ne S&L slides from this presentation is attached to this summary, i