ML20216F978

Forwards Eighteen Discrepancy Repts (Drs) Identified During Review Activities for Independent Corrective Action Verification Program.One Dr Has Been Encl But Not Accepted

ML20216F978
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	03/13/1998
From:	Schopfer D SARGENT & LUNDY, INC.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
9583-100, NUDOCS 9803190159
Download: ML20216F978 (55)

Text

c. s' g

4A y%.

i Sar gerat & Lundy c a

y l?} )7 l Don K. Schopfer

/

Senior Vice President 312-269-6078 March 13,1998 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 Enclosed are 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.

I have enclosed the following eighteen (18) DRs for which the NU resolutions have been reviewed and accepted by S&L. ,

1 DR No. DR-MP3-0291 DR No. DR-MP3-0840 DR No. DR-MP3-0437 DR No. DR-MP3-0907 DR No. DR-MP3-0622 DR No. DR-MP3-0943 DR No. DR-MP3-0654 DR No. DR-MP3-0963 DR No. DR-MP3-0677 DR No. DR-MP3-0986 DR No. DR-MP3-0744 DR No. DR-MP3-1001 DR No. DR-MP3-0797 DR No. DR-MP3-1013 DR No. DR-MP3-0821 DR No. DR-MP3-1035 DR No. DR-MP3-0822 DR No. DR-MP3-1040 I have also enclosed one (1) DR for which the NU resolution has been reviewed but not accepted.

S&L's comment on this resolution has been provided.

DR No. DR-MP3-1012 I 9803190159 DR 980313 ADOCK 05000423

. UllillIlllIll!!Illi!IHil,illl!Illlll 55 East Monroe Street

• Chicago, IL 60603-5780 USA + 312-269-2000 d

I l

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission March 13,1998 Document Control Desk Project No. 9583-100 Page 2 Please direct any questions to me at (312) 269-6078.

Yours very truly, h,Y ^

~

D. K. Sc pfer \

Senior Vice President and ICAVP Manager DKS:spr Enclosures Copies:

E. Imbro (1/1) Deputy Director, ICAVP Oversight 1 T. Concannon (1/1) Nuclear Energy Advisory Council J. Fougere (1/1) NU mNcevphrA98WO313-b. doc 1

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-4291 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Syelem DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: System Design N@. Mechanical Design g t4+- . cy Type: component Date O No System /Procese: Hvx NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Published. 10/30/97 Discrepancy: SLCRS Filter Housing Design Pressure Description During the review of the design parameters for the Supplementary Leak Collection and Release System (SLCRS) filter units (3HVR*FLT3A/3B) a discrepancy regarding the design pressure of the filter housings was ider.tified.

FSAR Table 1.8-1 Indicates that the filter units are in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.52, Rev. 2, position C.3.g which I requires the filter housings to be designed in accordance with the provisions of ANSI N509-1976 Section 5.6.

ANSI N509-1976 Section 5.6 states that the housings shall be designed and constructed to meet the structural and pressure loadings of Section 4. Section 4.6 identifies the following three pressure loading conditions: 1) Units and components that must withstand pressure transients,2) Units and components that must withstand fan peak pressure, and 3) Units and components subjected only to rated air flow, in accordance with ANSI N509-1976 Section 4.6.2.2, the SLCRS filter units must withstand a negative intemal pressure equal to or more negative than the peak pressure of fan 3HVR*FN12A/B since there are isolation dampers (3HVR*AOD95A/B) upstream of the SLCRS filter units.

Specification 2170.430-065 states that the filter housings are designed for 15 inches of water gauge (iwg) negative pressure .

The SLCRS exhaust fans (3HVR*FN12A/128) have a rated pressure of 22.2 twg per Specification 2176.430-141. Closure of the fire damper (3HVR*DMPF29, 3HVR*DMPF44) downstream of the fan or of the air operated damper (3HVR*AOD95A/95B) at the inlet of the filter housing could result an intemal housing pressure of -22.2 iwg which is greater than the -15 iwg design pressure for the housing.

Review Valid invalid Needed Date initletor: Stout, M. D. B 0 0 10/1/S7 VT Lead: Neri, Antnony A B D 0 10/3/07 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K B O O o/ 3/S7 O ior27'87 IRC chmn: Singh, Anand K O O Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/12/96 RESOLUTION First Response:

NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, Printed 3/13/98 9:22:43 AM Pega 1 of 3

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 4291 milistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0291, does not represent a discrepant condition. The filter trains can not be exposed to a negative pressure equlvalent to the full shut-off pressure of the fans since fail-open inlet dampers 3HVR*AOD95A/B have to fully open before fans 3HVR*FN12A/B can start and have to remain fully open for the fans to stay runnin9. Reference LSK-22-1R. Therefore, the filter trains need not withstand fan peak pressure.

Closure of fire dampers 3HVR*DMPF29 and 44 would have no j negative pressure effect on the filters because the dampers are located at the discharge of the fans and the filters are located at  ;

the suction. '

With dampers 3HVR*AOD95A/B fully open and each filter element (moisture separator, HEPA filter and charcoal adsorber) l

{

at its change-out delta P setpoint, the maximum pressure drop at

{

rated flow is 7.25 iwg. Reference setpoint calculations SP-3HVR-33,35,36 sent on transmittal 90 on 8/27/97 in response to RFl ,

273.

The filters and ducting between the inlet damper and the fan are I rated for the maximum negative pressure that they could be exposed to based on the cuntrol logic of the damper and the fan. The failure of one damper's limit switch could be taken as the single active failure. One complete unit would still be available for operation.

{

l Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.

Second Response: j NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0291 has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction.

As discussed in the meetin9 held on 2/10/98, filter units 3HVR*FLT3A/B cannot be isolated by closure of upstream dampers because 3HVR*AOD95A/B are electrically interlocked with fans 3HVR*FN12A/B and are " fall open". NU has written CR M3-98-0996 to address this exception to R.G.1.52, Position C.3g and R.G.1.140, Position C.3e The corrective action to this CR will revise FSAR Table 1.8-1, paragraph C.3g, and paragraph C.3e, and Table 6.5-1 to explain why fan shut off pressure was not selected as the filter unit housing negative intemal pressure. Corrective action will be completed post l startup.Since licensing basis and design basis are not affected, NU considers this issue a Significance Level 4.

i Attachments:

I CR M3-98-0996 with approved corrective action plan.

Previouery idenuned by NU7 O Yes @ No Non Diecrepent Condition?O Yes @ No naoiononPend6ng70 va @ No n.eenonunr=*ed70 va @ No Printed 3/13/98 9:22A6 AM Pege 2 of 3

Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0291 milistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report inlNetor: Stout, M. D. '

O MN VT Lead: Nerl, Arthony A VT Mor: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K oste: 3/12/98 st. Comments: Comments on First Response Agree with NU's response that closure of fire dampers 3HVR*DMPF29 and 3HVR*DMPF44 downstream of the fan would not result in the filter unit being subjected the fan rated pressure.

Disagree with NU's response that the filter housing only sees the 7.25 iwg pressure drop across the housing. The pressure drop in the ductwork upstream of the filter unit also needs to be accounted for. The pressure in the last section of the filter housing is approximately the same as the suction pressure for the exhaust fan. Results from procedure T331411M04 dated 11/85 show a fan suction pressure between 11 and 11.5 iwg which is lower than the 15 iwg filter housing design pressure. Failure of the upstream isolation damper (3HVR*AOD95A/B) to remain open while the fan is running would subject the filter housing to the fan peak pressure which is greater than the housing design pressure.

FSAR Table 1.8-1, Reg. Guide 1.52, Rev 2, paragraph C.2.1 clarification provides a description why fan shut off pressure was not used for duct leakage tests. A similiar clarification / exception to Reg. Guide 1.52, Rev. 2, paragraph C.3.g addressing why the fan peak pressure, as required by ANSI N509-1976 section 4.6.2.2, was not selected as the filter housing design pressure is needed.

Comments on Second Response:

Significance changed to Level 4 as FSAR change will provide clarification to RG 1.52 and ANSI N509 requirements.

J l

l Printed 3/13/98 9:22A8 AM PeGe 3 of 3

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0437 l Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED  !'

Review Element: System Design Discipline: Mechenical Design g

W. y Type: Cm O No  !

SystemProcess: sWP NRC C!"ss level:3 Date faxed to Nu:

Date Published.1/22/98 D6ecrepancy: Lack of Documentation to Demonstrate Qualification of the SWS Model Description GL 89-13 ltem 4 requires the licensee to confirm that the SWS will perform its intended safety function. In NU Letter B14406, NU stated that they were [in 1993] "in the process of completing quality assurance recommendations, sensitivity studies, etc., to fully qualify the [ computer) model" that had been established for the system. Per Letter B14406, testing had been completed for verification prior to issue of the letter, in dispositioning requirement SWP-0320 to confirm NU compliance with this commitment relative to GL 89-13, the hydraulic model used by NU to respond to GL 89-13 was reviewed. This model is summarized in Calculation 90-069-1065-M3. This calculation summarizes the results from the Westin0 house PEGISYS model operating alignments from j Calculation 90-069-1116-M3, which utilized input from )

Westinghouse documents FSE/SS-NEU-1405 and 1488, plus updates to these documents, for the physical representation of the Millstone SW system. These FSE/SS-NEU documents could not be located in the NU calculation database, but were fumished by NU upon request for review. Calculation 90-069-1065-M3 contains the statement on page 6, paragraph ll that "the model was not adjusted to match the field test data." No documentation could be found in any of these documents that confirmed validation of either the PEGISYS model or of the FSE/SS-NEU documents that formed the basis for the plant 4

configuration used in the model. Qualification of the model, or confirmation that this had been completed, was not found to be addressed in later NU submittals to the NRC regarding GL 89-

13. Therefore it was not possible to confirm NU compilance with the commitment contained in Letter B14406 "to fully qualify the SWS model" from the documents in the review scope.

Review Valid inveild Needed Date initiator: Tenwinket, J. L. O O O 2/22/97 VT Leed: Neri. Anthony A @ Q Q 12/23/97 VT Mor: Schopfer, Don K B D 0 12/23/97 NtC Chmn: Singh, Anand K G O O 1'18'88 Date:

INVALID: l Date: 3/11/98 RESOLUTION. Disposition:

NU has concluded that DR-MP3-0437 has identified a condition Printed 3/13/98 9:28:44 AM PeGe 1 of 3

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0437 milistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report previously discovered by NU which has been corrected.

Calculation 90-069-1065-M3 was revised in accordance with CCN 6, issued 10/23/97. The reason forthe chanQe was to revise the results based on calculations97-035,97-041 and 97-002, which incorporate the latest information available regarding the service water system.

These calculations were performed under contract with Protopower in accordance with Po#333870 cliange order issued 9/15/95 to update the SW flow model by incorporating a number of new piping configurations and to empirically adjust the model test data obtained during refueling outa0e RFO-5 (Ref. IST-3 016). The calculation reviews and the Proto-flow modeling was an on-going activity throughout 1996 and 1997 until CCN 6 to calculation 90-069-1065-M3 was issued. This will satisfy the commitment to GL 89-13.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that DR-MP3-0437 has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which has been corrected.

Calculation 90-069-1065-M3 was revised in accordance with CCN 6, issued 10/23/97. The reason for the change was to revise the results based on calculations97-035,97-041 and 97-002, which incorporate the latest information available regarding the service water system.

These calculations are the service water system flow model and accurately represent the system as it physically exists today.

The commitment, in accordance with GL 89-13 Item IV, requiring the Licensee to confirm that the system will perform its intended function in accordance with the licensing basis is being satisfied by the incorporation of the test data obtained during RFO-5 into calculation 90-069-1065-M3.

No corrective adion is required since the review of the calculations and modeling of the Service Water System was an on-going activity throu0hout 1996 and 1997 until CCN 6 to calculation 90-069-1065-M3 was issued, therefore, this DR is not a restraint to unit start-up.

Previously idenused by NU? (9) vos O No NonDiscrepentCondition?O vos (G) No naciunonreadina?O va @ No , % unr d?O va @ No moview

""~"I "'***d '

m Tm,n -

VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K NtC Chmn: Singh. Anand K B O O se Date: 3/11/96 sL Comments: S&L agrees with the disposition provided by NU. It is noted that the review of Calculation 90-069-1065-M3, resulting in this DR, was performed with only CCNs 1 and 2. CCNs 3 through 6 were Printed 3/13/96 9:28:47 AM PeGe 2 of 3

Northett Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR-MP3-0437 Minstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report not available for S&L review until after a 10/22/97 meeting with NU.

PrWed T1$969:28:49AM Page 3 of 3

.. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J

DR No. DR-MP3 4622 Northeast Utilities ICAVP milistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmatic DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element. corredive Action Process Diecipline: Other Ow Discrepency Type: Procedure implementation gg SystemProcess: N/A NRC SL ' =e level:4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdished.11/24S7 E4 - :y: inadequate Corrective Action Documentation

Description:

The corrective action described in CR M3-97-2253 is incomplete or inadequate in the following areas:

1. No corrective actions are identified in the Corrective Action Plan (RP4-1, pa0e 5 of 9) other than to revise procedures U3 WC-1 and WPC-2.

2. Page 2 of 9 of the Form contains a statement that 00 MP3-010-97 addresses MEPL issues and that Engineering Evaluation M3-EV-970009 addresses acceptability of components needed for defense in depth and covered items referred to in this CR (except CCP*AVO19). This information should be expanded upon and included in the Corrective Action Plan portion of the CR.

3. Corrective Actions relative to Valve CCP*AOV19, identified as specifically excluded from the above evaluations, is not addressed in the CR.

In summary, this CR is not properly documented and does not contain sufficient information with respect to corrective action.

Review Valid invelld Needed Date O iilid'S7 initiator: Wrone. S. P. 8 O 15/14S7 VT Leed: Ryan,Thomes J B O O Sil 7/S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K B O O UtC Chmn: sin 0h, Anand K G O O 11/21/97 Date:

INVAUD:

Date: 3/11/96 RESOLUTION Disposition NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0622, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. The adverse condition that was identified in M3-97-2253 related to various AWOs that used non-QA material in QA applications. As noted in the DR, the corrective action for CR M3-97-2253 is vague and insufficient in that it did not address the broader implications of parts control or properiy reference related corrective actions.Similar issues were previously identified and addressed in ACRs M3-97-0287, M2 97 0150 and M197 0199. The referenced Operability Determination, OD MP3 010-97 was written in response to M3 97-0287 to justify the Page1 of 2 Printed 3/13/98 9:31:31 AM

ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0622 Northe:st Utilities Miiistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report operability of 3 EGO *P4A and its associated equipment. The OD was used for M3 97 2253 because it already addressed the MEPL issues identified in M3 97 0287. Similariy, M3 EV 970009 addressed acceptability of components referred to in both CRs.

Although 3CCP*AOV19 was not in the scope of the operability determination and engineering evaluation, a review of recent work history (see attached AWOs) has verified that the issues identified in M3-97 2253 relate to historical documentation and do not impact current component operability.However, NU recognizes that the link between the two CRs is not obvious. M3-97-2253 did not properly reference the corrective actions of MS-97-0287. The Corrective Actions Department has since linked the two corrective action plans eledronically in AITTS for future reference. CR M3-98-0593 has been initiated to document this discrepancy but it is only for trending purposes.Further, CR M3-98-0407 (AR 98001846) was written on 1/26/98 to document areas of ineffective corrective actions with regards to configuration control and materials. This CR's corrective actions supplement M3 97-0287.NU concludes that because proper corrective action was implemented under M3-97-0287 and M3-98-0407, no licensing or design basis discrepancy or program failure exists. Therefore, this is considered a significance level 4 DR.

Condusion NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0622, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. The subject CR had previously been dispositioned by CR M3-97-0287 with corrective actions ongoing. However, CR M3-98-0593 has been initiated to identify the lack of sufficient documentation between the two CRs. NU concludes that because proper corrective action was implemented under M3-97-0287 and M3-98-0407, no licensing or design basis discrepancy or program failure exists. Therefore, this is considered a significance level 4 DR.

Prwlously idenuned by Nu? U vos (9) No Non Discrepent Condition?U vos (#) No Resolution Pendhsg?O vos

• No nosoiunonunresoeved70 vos @ No noview A- -- - _r Not A=- - - - - Needed Date j D D MN l VT Lead: Ryan, Thomes J D

VT Mor: schopper, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date: 3/11/g8 st Comments: The specific concems documented in the DR have been addressed, however the the corrective actions described in the attached CR M3-98-0407 while related, are considered to address separate and more comprehensive issues related to configuration control of work & materials. As such, acceptance l of the response to this DR does not include review and acceptance of the corrective action plan for CR M3-98-0407.

Page 2 of 2 Prtnted 3/13/96 9.31:34 AM

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 4654 ,

Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: system Desien gg

-: - D- n o y.

F ; cy Type: Component Date g systemProcese: Oss NRC W leW:4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdiohed 12/20/97 F , - :i: Inconsistency between FSAR Sec 6.1.1.1 & design specs w/

respect exclusion of low melting alloys.

Dacription: FSAR Section 6.1.1.1 states that low melting alloys (zinc, lead, ,

I mercury, etc.) that can cause stress corrosion cracking when in contact with stainless steel is prohibited during fabrication of stainless steel parts. A review of component design specifications show that the design of the following components does not address the exclusion of low melting alloys during fabrication of stainless steel parts:

3QSS*P3A,B 3QSS*TK1 3QSS*MOV34A,B 3QSS-V44 3QSS*V945, V946 .

3QSS*V1,V2,VS,V6 )

3RSS*P1A,B,C,D 1 3RSS-P2A,B 3RSS*MOV20A,B,C,D 3RSS*MOV23A,B,C,D ,

3RSS*V38-V45 3RSS*V50-V53

References:

f Specification 2214.602-040 Revision 6 j Specification 2362.200-164 Revision 1 Specification 2275.001-023 Revision 3 Specification 2214.802-044 Revision 1 Specification 2214.202-050 Revision 7 Review ,

vend invalid Needed Date inittstor: Feingold, D. J. O O O 12/1/s7 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A B D D 5:/5/S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O O 12/11/97 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K B O O 12/ tees 7 Date:

INVAUD:

Date: 3/12/98 PEsOLUTioN. Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0654 has identifitxi a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. Condition Report ( CR ) M3-98-0526 ( See Attached ) was written to provide the necessary corrective Pdnted 3/13S6 9:32;17 AM Page 1 of 3

ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0654 Northe:st Utilities i Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report actions to resolve this issue. The corrective actions to correct this issue are as follows:

1. To review the specifications 2214.602-040,2362.200-164, l 2275.001-023,2214.602-044,2214.202-050 to verify that the specifications contain statements of precaution for contamination of stainless steel surfaces and to review vendor documentation i to determine if statements regarding the use of low melting point  !

alloy materials were provided with that documentation.

2. To review the vendors supplying equipment purchased under f specifications 2214.602-040, 2362.200-164, 2275.001-023, i 2214.802-044,2214.202-050 to verify that all had QA Programs in place and all procedures were reviewed and approved.

These corrective adions shall formulate the basis of a study to ,

complete the documentation of the pedigree of the components i purchased under the referenced specifications.

The exclusion of low melting point alloys during the manufacture of stainless steels is based upon a concem for stress corrosion cracking ( SCC ). The referenced components operate at low temperatures and pressures as well as stress and are therefore normally not subiect to SCC. Based upon the preceding discussion, the LB / DB of MP3 is not impacted by this discrepancy therefore NU considers this issue to be a level 4 discrepancy.

This corrective action will be performed Post MP3 Startup.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0654 has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. The corrective actions necessary to resolve the issue detailed in DR-MP3-0654 will be implemented and tracked under the auspices of condition report M3-98-0526 ( See Attached ). The corrective action outlined in Condition Report M3-98-0526 necessary to correct this issue is to perform a study to verify the exclusion of the use of low melting point alloys during the manufacture of the components purchased under specifications 2214.602-040, 2362.200-164, 2275.001-023, 2214.802-044, 2214.202-050. The exclusion of low melting point alloys during the manufacture of stainless steels is based upon a concem for stress corrosion cracking ( SCC ). The referenced components operate at low temperatures and pressures as well as stress and are therefore normally not subject to SCC. Based upon the preceding discussion, the LB /

DB of MP3 is not impacted by this discrepancy therefore NU considers this issue to be a level 4 discrepancy.This corrective action will be performed Post MP3 Startup.

Previously identined by Nu? O Yes @ No NonDiecrepantCondition?Q Yes @ No Printed 3n3/98 9:3220 AM Page 2 of 3

Norther;st Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR-MP3 0654 Minstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report ResolutionPending?O v (*) no p - % unr oeved7C) v c.) no Review initiator: Feingold, D. J.

VT Leed: Nerl. Anthony A O O **

VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:

SL Comment.:

Printed 3/1398 9:32:22 AM Pope 3 of 3

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0677 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: ConAguration DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: System Instenstion

@ Yes Discroponey Type: instensuon implementation O No 8, ^ i =: HVX NRC Sigrmicence level: NA Date faxed to NU-Date Pulmehed.12/7/97 r . ms Walkoown Discrepancies of HVX and SLCRS Dacription The following discrepancy item was found during the walkdown of the ducting and mechanical equipment of the HVX and SLCRS:

Dampers 3HVR*DMP6, *DMP7, and *DMP8 were observed on 11/13/97 to still be in summer position and should be adjusted to fully closed winter position on 11/1/yr per P&lD EM-148A Rev 25 note 17 and PDCR MP3-93-014.

Review Valid invoud Needed Date initiator: Reed, J. W. O O O 15/14S7 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony ^ O O O tii2as7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O O i2/ sis 7 IRC Chrnn: Singh, Anand K S O O $2/3/97 Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/12/96 RESOLUTION Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0677 does not represent a discrepant condition. The realignment to winter mode was delayed until Nov.15,1997. This is acceptable per PDCR MP3 93 014. The shift is normally scheduled between 11/1 and 11/5 but the supporting calculation allows a time window of 15 days past the target date.

The early schedule date is to ensure we dont walt until the drop dead date and then have a LOCA which would cause access problems to the dampers. The change over to winter mode was deliberately delayed until the end of the 15 day window to facilitate plant testing. Significance level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0667 does not represent a discrepant condition. The realignment to winter mode was delayed until Nov.15,1997. This is acceptable per PDCR MP3 93 014. The shift is normally scheduled between 11/1 and 11/5 but a window of 15 days past the target date is allowed. S10nificance level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.

Previously identifled try NU7 (.) Yes (e) No Non Discrepent Conditionr@ Yes C) No RamutionPenene70 va @ No = % unt a m v.47 0 Y = @ No Revie.

Initietor: Stout, M. D.

g O O 3/12/98 Prtnted 3/13969:33:17 AM Page 1 of 2

i DR No. DR-MP34677 l Northe:st Utilities ICAVP milistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report

,,..---.,n VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K g g g ,,

pic chmn: Singh, Anand K g q O O O Date: 3/12/98 sL comments: Agree that Calculation 3-92-103-191-M3, Rev.1, CCN 1-003 condudes that the switchover date should be Nov 1 to Nov 15 to prevent overcooling of the CCP pump area.

1 i

Printed 3/1T96 9.33.21 AM Pege 2 of 2

Northeast UtiHties ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-4744 Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: Syelem Deelen Diecipline: Mechanical Design

'" Om

, _y Type: Componert Date g systemProcess: RsS NRC signtIIconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdished.12/20S7

' T inconsistency between FSAR Sec 6.3.2.4 & the seating desi0n of 3RSSWOV20A,B,C,D & 3RSSWOV23A,B,C,D

Description:

FSAR Section 6.3.2.4 states that, for components of the emergency core cooling systern (ECCS), valve seating surfaces are hard-faced with Stellite number 6 or equivalent to prevent galling and to reduce wear. FSAR Table 6.3-1 identify components within the containment recirculation spray system flowpath as being part of the ECCS.

According to P&lD EM-112C Revision 16 and design specifications SP-ME 764 Revision 2 and 2362.200164 Revision 1, valves 3RSSWOV20A,B,C,D and 3RSSWOV23A,B,C,D are butterfly valves with soft seats.

Because butterfly valves typically contain soft seats, the statement in FSAR Section 6.3.2.4 infers that no butterfly valves are installed in systems used for emergency core cooling. l Review Velid involid Needed Date inatiator: Feingold, D. J. O O O 2rs/97 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A 8 0 0 52 isis 7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Dor. K O O O $2iiirer utC Chmn: singh, Anand K G O O 12tisis7 Date:

INVAUD:

Date: 3/12/96 RESOLUTION Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0744 has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. Condition Report ( CR ) M3-98-0594 ( See Attached ) was written to provide the necessary corrective adion to resolve this issue. The corrective action to correct this issue is to issue a FSARCR to clarify the appropriate applicability of valve seat material within the ECCS. This corrective action is an enhancement to the FSAR to clarify plant configuration. Based upon the preceding discussion, the LB/DB of MP3 is not impacted by this discrepancy therefore NU considers this issue to be a level 4 discrepancy. This corrective action will be performed Post MP3 Startup.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0744 has i identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which Printed 3/1$98 9Ao:53AM Pope i or 2

Northeast UtilitiSs ICAVP DR No. DR-MP34744 milistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report requires correction. The corrective action necessary to resolve the issue detailed in DR-MP3-0744 will be implemented and tracked under the auspices of condition report M3-98-0594 ( See Attached ). The corrective action outlined in Condition Report M3-96-0594 necessary to correct this issue is to issue a FSARCR to clarify the appropriate applicability of valve seat material within the ECCS. This corrective action is an enhancement to the FSAR to clarify plant configuration. Based upon the preceding discussion, the LB/DB of MP3 is not impacted by this discrepancy therefore NU considers this issue to be a level 4 discreoancy. This corrective action will be performed Post MP3 Startup.

N. -----, Identiaed by Nu? U vos (S) No NonDiscrepentCondithm?Q Yes (S) No ResokdionPendng?O va @ u. pe unr=*ed70 va @ wo R.*w initiator: Feingold. D. J.

VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Dele: )

sL Comments:

i I

Printed 3/13/98 9417 AM Page 2 of 2

ICAVP DR No. DR-MP34797 Northeast Utilities Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Potential Opereldlity issue Diecipune: Electrical Design Om Descrepancy Type: Calculebon gg SystemRocess: N/A NRC Signiacance level: NA Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdiohed.1/1o96 W zi: Cable lengths used do not agree with NUSCO Cable and Raceway (Calculation 228E).

Ducription This calculation verifies the short circuit withstand ratings for Cat. I 1000 V Short length power cables.

The cable lengths used in Attachment til of the calculation do not agree with the cable lengths listed in the NUSCO Cable and Raceway System. The source of the lengths used in the calculation are from an interoffice correspondence included as Attachment til of the calculation. An explanation of the basis for these lengths should be included in the calculation.

This calculation refers to Calculation 141E. Calculation 141E has been superseded by Calculation NL-051 and the information from Calculation NL-051 should be used in this calculation.

Review Valid inveNd Needed Date O 2716sr initiator. crochett. Ed. O O VT t.eed: Nw1. Anthony A O Q Q 12/16/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q Q Q 12/23S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K G O O 12rati97 Date:

INVAUD:

Dele: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION. NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0797, does not represent a discrepant condition. The

" actual cable lengths" from attachment til used in the calculation 228E are less than the cable lengths in the Cable and Raceway System. The shorter cable lengths provide more conservative results than longer cable lengths for the Short Circuit Withstand Rating Calculation.

Today the procedure for doing the calculation would use the Design Control Manual DCM chapter 5. Attachment 1 is the approved calculation format that is in use today. The fact that the old calculation does not follow the newer format or explain all basis does not make it discrepant.

An Engineering Report M3-ERP-97-0002 " Assessment of Critical Calculation MP3 Electrical Distribution System"in support of the MP310CFR50.54(f) effort was completed March 21,1997.

Calculation 228E was reviewed from an administrative and technical assessment standpoint eaJ found to be acceptable. NU revisited this assessment as a result of this DR and verified that the condition documented as result of the assessment is Printed 3/13/96 9 41:00 AM Page 1 of 2

l Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0797 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report acceptable. One of the general comments from the calculation review checklist stated, " Replace calculation with Cable Sizing database, which verifies the ampacalty, voltage drop, protective  ;

devke settings, and short circuit capability for all cables."

Condition Report (CR) M3-971217 was written to track the recommendations of the Engineering Report M3-ERP-97-0002.

Item 3 of the approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) setup a tracking number in the Action item Tracking and Trending System (AITTS) as A/R 97009922-03 for conso!) dating and voiding calculations. The item is scheduled for completion post startup.

Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0797, does not represent a discrepant condition. The shorter cable lengths in attachment 111 of 228E provides more conservative results than longer cable lengths the Cable and Raceway System for the Short Circuit Withstand Rating Calculation. Calculation 2285 is being consolidated with other calculations as result of the Engineering Report " Assessment of  !

Critical Calculation MP3 Electrical Distribution System" in support of the MP310CFR50.54(f).

Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a disciepant condition.

Previously identiced t y NU? O Yes @ No Non DiscrepentCondition?@ Yes U No RecoiuuanPondias?O Yee @ No PM% Unresolved?O Yee @ No Review

" "'^ E "**d*d "*

initiator: womer. l.

VT Leed: Nat, Ardhony A B VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K NtC Chmn: singh. Anand K

' Date: 3/12/98 SL Comments:

Printed W1396 9 41.04 AM Page 2 of 2 l

l I

ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0821 Northeast Utilities Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR REsot.tmoN ACCEPTED Review Element: system Design Diecipune: Mechanical Desi0n Q y,,

E'----- ziType: W gg systemerocese: DGX NRC signincance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdished 1/22/96 E' . - :i; Discrepancies for P&lD's EM-116B-25 and EM-116D-5  !

Description:

Review of the EGA system P&lD's EM-116B-25 and EM-116D 5 yleided following discrepancies:

1. Per NU (IRF-00993) a sizing calculation for EGA piping was j not required. Although the off-skid piping was supplied by NU, J the piping was sized in accordance with Colt Industries schematic drawing Starting Air & Control Air Schematic, dwg. no.

2447.300-241-006. Review of this NU drawing (Rev. J) and Colt industries' OIM-241 schematic drawing 11869459 confirms that the NU provided piping was sized as shown on the vendor drawing. However, the P&lD does not match either schematic ,

I drawing. By comparison of the drawings it can be determined that the schematic drawing does not show the air dryer package, its bypass, the cross tie between the two Starting Air trains (lines 3-EGA-750-5-3 and 3-EGA-750-15-3), and hoses 3EGA* HOSE 1 A,1B,2A, and 28. In addition, a 1/2" takeoff from 3/8" compressed air line to the Air Tank 3EGA*TK3A/B supplying control air to Jacket water instruments and controls shown on the schematic is not shown on the P&lD's. The comparison also shows that the air compressor discharge relief valve setpoint is 450 psig on the schematic drawing, and 500 psig on the P&lD. This conditions indicate two discrepancies:

- System P&lD and the schematic drawing do not match, and

- Significant changes to the system may have required line sizing calculation, or a pressure drop calculation, neither of which was found existing at time of the review.

2. Safety class change points are not shown at the point of safety class change. For instance: safety class change between line 3-EGA-750-84-4 and the check valve 3EGA*V4 should be shown at the valve inlet nozzle, and not on the line itself. Furthermore, as shown on the P&lD, the line number (Class 4 line) is shown on the Class 3 side of the safety class change point. The same is true for the equivalent safety class change points for the other three Starting Air trains. j in addition, no safety class change is shown at the Air Receiver Tank drain valve (3EGA*V7, 'V17, 'V972, *V973) outlet, where the drain piping is apparently Class 4. The drain line downstream of the valve has no line number (which would identify pipe safety class), and the continuation drawing (EM-157A) does not identify pipe safety class either. However, the drain line continues into ,

Misc. Floor Drains (DNF) system, where the first valves in the system, check valves 3DNF-V5 and 3DNF-V3 are non-safety related, p ,

3. Cc- ;t ^;;? "OOS !^t^'r th"! th0 '^!!~;f",; p ,

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0821 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report components included in PDDS are not on the system P&lD's:

Excess flow valves 3EGA*EFV29A/B and isolation valves 3EGA*V978 and 'V991.

4. Lines 3-EGA-500-73-4 and 3-EGA-500-50-4 on drawing EM-116D-5 are misnumbered as 3-EGA-500-69-4 and 3-EGA-30-4 respectively, as evident from the Line List . Also, the drain line continuation drawing for Air Receiver Tank 3EGA*TK2B should be identified as EM-157A instead of EM-1578.

Review Vaud invand Needed Date j initiator: obersnetsoien. O O O $2r23m7 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A O O O 12/20 s7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K G O O 12/23s7 l Ntc Chmn: singh, Anand K g Q Q 1/16S8 Date:

INVAUD: l oste: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION' Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0821, items 1 & 4, has identified conditions not previously discovered by NU that require correction. CR M3-98-0428 has been issued to address the discrepancies. The corrective action revises the P&lDs line numbers and continuation flags in accordance with discrepancy item 4 and revises the schematic drawing to refer to P&lD for current configuration. Included is an assignment to evaluate a revision to the drawing category for vendor schematics also shown on P&lDs. The drawing revisions and category evaluation are scheduled for completion post start up. i l

Specifically, the items are addressed as follows:

Item 1: The air dryer package,its bypass, the cross-tie between the two starting air trains (lines 3-EGA-750-5-3 and 3-EGA-750-15-3), and hoses 3EGA* HOSE 1 A,1B,2A, and 28 are documented on piping isometrics (i.e. CP-360261 sh 4, CP-360705), EP-60C and P&lDs EM-1168 & D. The vendor suppiled schematic drawing was not updated. This item resulted in CR M3-98-0428.

Item 4: Lines 3-EGA-500 69-4 & 3-EGA-500-30-4 on EM 116D zone G-7 & H-9 should be renumbered to 3-EGA-500-73-4 & 3-EGA-500-50-4 respectively. The continuation flag from drain valve 3EGA*V972 on EM 116D ZONE J-8 should be revised to EM 157A. This item resulted in CR M3-98-0428.

The following items identified in item 1 are considered to be non-discrepant based on the following:

Air dryer modifications were accomplished in accordance with PDCR MP3-86-038, reference pressure drop calculation NM-038-EGA. The air compressor discharge relief valves 3EGA-Printed 3/13S8 9:41:43 AM Pege 2 of 4

I Northecst Utstieo ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 4421 utsistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report RV20B1/B2 & A1/A2 setpoints were revised to 500 psig in accordance modification PDCR MP3-92-102, supposted by calculation 3-92-102-263-M3, vAlch superseded calculation NM-036-EGA; irr,plemented by DCN DM3-S 1269-93 and is posted against vendor drawing 2447.300-241-008.

The 1/2" takeoff from 3/8" compressed air line to 3EGA*TK3A/B has been deleted in accordance with DCN DM3-00-1215-96 &

DM3-001216-96 and these DCNs are posted against vendor drawing 2447.300 241-008.

NU has concluded that discrepeacy report DR-MP3-0821, item 2 has identified a condition previously discovered by NU. The discrepancy for safety class changes, valve 3EGA*V4, line 3-EGA-750-84-4 and equivalent trains was previously discovered by ACR MS-96-0245 & NCR 395-087 and resolved by DCN DM3-00-0146-97, which has been incorporated into P&lDs EM-116B-29 & EM 116D-10.

The remaining items identified in item 2 are considered non-discrepent based on the following:

The second item addresses safety class changes for valves 3EGA*V7,17,972,973. Note 5 on EM 116A explains that all vent, drain & pressure connections are safety class 4 down stream of the first valve unless otherwise noted. The continuation flag for drains does not represent piping connected to drains, it directs you to an area in the diesel building as to which floor drain it will drain into. These items are considered non-discrepent.

Item 3: These valves,3EGA*EFV29A/B, V978 and V991 have been removed in accordance with DCN DM3-00-1215-96 & DM3-00-1216-96 and the PDDS data base has been updated by the DCR M3-96-076. This Mem is considered non-discrepant.

System design basis is supported by existing P&lDs, PDCRs and DCNs listed above. As such, NU considers this a Significance Level 4 discrepancy. 4

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0821, has identified several conditions. The vendor schematic was not updated for the design change identified in item 1 and P&!D labeling discrepancy identified in item 4 have not been previously discovered by NU and require correction. The first drawing issue listed in item 2 was previously discovered by NU and corrected by DCN. The second issue is not discrepant. The remaining drawing issue listed in item 1 and the item 3 issue were changes from plant modifications. These items are  !

considered non-discrepent.

CR M3-98-0428 was issued as a result of Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0821 to develop the conective action. The corrective action revises the P&lDs in accordance with discrepancy item 4 and revises the schematic drawino to refer to P&lD for current Printed 3/13/06 9:41:44 AM Page 3 or 4

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0821 millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report configuration. Included is an assignment to evaluate a revision i l to the drawing category for vendor schematics also shown on l P&lDs. The drawing revisions and category evluation are scheduled for completion post start-up.

(

System design basis is supported by existing P&lDs, PDCRs and DCNs. As such, NU considers this a Significance Level 4 discrepancy.

Previouety identined by Nu? O Yee IG) No Non Diecrepent Condition 70 Yee (G) No neeokman Penang 70 vos @ No nosokmanunresoeved70 vee @ No Review g g,g Areafdaham Not Areap8ahia Needed Date VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anend K Date: 3/12/98 sL Comments: NU disposition is acceptable. S&L is revising the Significance Level from 3 to 4.

The first discrepancy has two parts: differences between the system P&lD's and (vendor) schematic drawings, and a lack of line sizing or pressure drop calculation. S&L agrees with NU disposition re0arding the drawing differences, and finds the corrective action described in CR M3-98-0428 acceptable. S&L also accepts the disposition of the second part of the discrepancy based on the justification for the setpoint change found in the CCN 1 to the calculation 3-92-102-263-M3, item 6 on page 1 of 2.

S&L agrees that a part of the second discrepancy was previously identified by NU and corrective action taken via DCR DM3 0146-97, initiated 2/06/97. S&L also agrees with NU's disposition for the remaining part of this discrepancy. Therefore, the condition described in the second discrepancy is non-discrepant.

The third discrepancy concems discrepancies between P&lD and the PDDS. Based on submitted information S&L has verified that the components found in PDDS but not found on P&lD were removed per DCN's DM3-00-1215-96 and DM3-00-1216-96, and that PDDS Data Packa0e was submitted via DCR M3-90-076.

S&L has also verified that the components are no longer in PDDS. This condition is non-discrepant.

S&L agrees with NU disposition for the fourth discrepancy.

Pnnted 3/13/96 9.41:45 AM Page 4 or 4

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0822 millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Psview Element: Syelem Design Discipline: Mechanicef Desig" 9' _ . .:p Type: Drawing O vee g

Systemerocese: DGX NRC 4 =s level:4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Pubsiehed t/22/98

"-: . my: Discrepancies for P&lD's EM-116A-27 and EM-116C-12 Description' Review of the EGS system portion of the P&lD's EM-116A-27 and EM-116C-12 yielded following discrepancies:

1. Comparison of P&lD with the PDDS database resulted in following discrepancies:

- 3EGS*PS28A1 is found in PDDS, but could not be found on P&lD,

- 3EGS*Tl37A/B is safety related per PD'uS, non safety related per P&lD,

- 3EGS*P3, Engine Sump appeus on P&lD (15), but could not be found in PDDS. The same mark number is used for both diesel generators, that is on both P&lD's. Per equipment code it appears to be a number for a pump, although pump is not shown at that location; it is also in conflict with the Engine Driven Intercooler Water Pump number 3EGS*P3A/B,

- 3EGS*EG1 A could not be found in the PDDS database.

2. Une 3-EGS-500-26-3(A-) on drawing EM-116A 27 is misnumbered as 3-EGS-500-22-3(B-). Une number 3-EGS-500-22-3 is already assigned to intercooler retum line for diesel generator A (on the same drawing). In addition, the direction of this line in the Une Ust is erroneously described as connecting to the hose 3EGS* HOSE 68; the correct number for the connecting hose is 3EGS* HOSE 6A.

Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: obersnes,sojen. O O O i2/ tars 7 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A B O O 12/2 ors 7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O $2/23/97 O O O 5/15/S8 Date:

INVALIO:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUDoN. Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0822, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU. UIR's 2376, 1373,2600,1639, and 1358 identified these P&lD deficiencies as part of the PI-24 P&lD Walkdown for the EM-116 series P&lD's. Resolution to the UIR's will resolve the deficiencies after startup.

1.A Pressure switch is located on EM 1168, zone M-4. UIR 2376 item 3 identifies PDDS deficiency.

1.B UIR 1373 item B.9 notes label deficiency.

1.C UlR 2600 items A.1 and A.2 identify the Engine Sump Printed 3/13/98 9:48:38 AM Page 1 or 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 4822 millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report deficiencies.

1.D UIR 1639 identifies defx:lency.

2.A UlR 1358 items Q.4 and Q.17 identify deficiencies.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0822, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU. UIR's 2376, 1373,2600,1639, and 1358 identifidu! the P&lD deficiencies and will correct the deficiencies after startup.

. . . . ";identiaed by Nu? U Yes (9) No Non Discrepent condition?U Yes (9) No neemison PenangrO Yes @ No a-*% unroom.d70 vos @ ea Review m , % , ,, A~Ya Not #- , ^ Nooded Date VT 1.eed: Norf, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anend K Date: 3/12/98 st.commente: 1.A S&L agrees that this discrepancy was previously discovered by NU.

1.B S&L disagrees with the NU disposition. The discrepancy points out the difference in the component number shown on P&lD and in the PDDS. Per UiR 1373 NU has previously discovered the difference in the component number shown on P&lD and on the field label. Therefore, the discrepancy was not previously discovered by NU.

1.C S&L agrees that this discrepancy was previously discovered by NU.

1.D S&L agrees that this discrepancy was previously discovered by NU.

2.A S&L agrees that this discrepancy was previously discovered by NU.

l, l

Printed 3f1398 9:48:42 AM PeGe 2 of 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0440 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR REs0LUTioN ACCEPTED '

Review Element: System Design r"- : :y Type: Calculation O vos i systemProcess: DGX g i NRC signHicence level: NA Date faxed to Nu:

Date Published.1/18/96 D6ecrepency: Design Temperatures Vary Among Calculations - Emergency Fuel Oil System

Description:

Reference SER Section 9.5.4.1, Page 9-66 and REQ-MP3-DGX-0633 The design basis for the Emergency Diesel Generators is based on an ambient temperature range of minus 17 degrees F to plus 102 degrees F. However, in general, calculations for the fuel oil system do not address these parameters and develop their own conditions as sampled below:

Calc # P(T)-1019 0 doortees F to plus 60 F Calc # P(B)-0799 plus 24 de0rees F to plus 104 F Calc # 79-236-750-GP Ambient (?) to plus 150 F Review Vaud InveNd Needed Date initiator: Ruse,Eart.

8 O O $2iises7 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A B O O 12/1o/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K B O O $2/23/s7  :

IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O 1/15'88 Det.:

INVALID:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION. Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0840 does not represent a discrepant condition. SER Section 9.5.4.1 lists outdoor service conditions of-17 F to 102 F for ambient air intake. This temperature range related to combustion air was provided to the NRC by NU as a response to Question 430.133.

Diesel oil storage and transfer system calculations P(T)-1019,79-236 750-GP, and P(T)-0799 utilize conditions consistent with NETM 26, Environmental Design Conditions, for the diesel generator enclosure and the diesel Generator fuel oil vault their analyzed systems are located within.

The design basis temperature of the diesel oil storage and transfer system is based on outside dry bulb range of 0 F to 86 F (FSAR 9.5.4.1 & 9.5.6.1). Temperature analyses calculations further refine these values to 16 F to 90 F (NETM 26-Appendix K, Calculation P(B)-1000) for vault temperatures and 50 F to 120 F for the diesel rooms (NETM 26-Appendix G FSAR 9.5.6.1).

Temperatures utilized in the calculations are based on these environmental design conditions by reference to NETM 26 and the line designation table.

Printed 3/13/96 9:52:26 AM Page 1 of 3

1 l

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 4840 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report -

The calculations temperatures identified by this DR are discussed further as follows:

Calculation P(T)-1019 (Fuel Vault / Diesel Room) l' Piping temperatures used ambient temperatures from reference NETM 26. Calculation of maximum static pressure used lowest reference temperature, O F and converted maximum specific gravity for No 2 fuel oil (.887 g 60 F)

Calculation 79-236-75MP (Diesel Room)

The use of a higher temperature of 150 F gives conservative stress levels at the diesel fuel oil nozzles (input calculation 79-

)

236-491GP use of 125 is consistent with its line designation table '

120 F max value reference)

Calculation P(T)-0799 (Fuel Vault)

Allowable kinematic viscosity of 1.9 to 4.1 used is rated at 40 C (104 F). NPSH is calculated at 90 F maximum vault temperature. Rev 0 of the calculation sized the oil transfer flow (

to the day tanks based on low end temperature of 0 F in the fuel j oil vaults rooms. Revision 1 evaluation at fuel oil cloud point of 24 F *

• Revision 0 of calculation P(T)-0799 was written concurrent with calculation P(B)-1000 and thus conservatively used 0 F versus 16 F calculated temperature for sizing the j equipment. A pumping capacity over four(4) times the diesel i' usage rate is confirmed by both revisions of calculation P(T)-

0799. Revision 1 of the calculation use of 24 F is both realistic and conservative as it more closely represents low pumping conditions as recorded by the EQ Temperature Monitoring system reading of 38.6 F during extended winter temperature conditions in the teens and single digits.

Based on the use of temperatures in the calculations consistent with NETM-26, Environmental Design Conditions, this condition is not considered a design nor generic issue.

NRC Significance Level criteria do not apply as this is a non-discrepent condition.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0840 does not represent a discrepant condition. The design temperature range of the diesel oil system is incorporated into the calculations identified in the DR by reference to NETM 26 and the line designation table. Based on the temperature inputs used in the calculations the condition identified in this DR is not considered a design nor generic issue. NRC Significance Level 4 criteria do not apply as this is a non-discrepant condition. I Previously identined by NU? O Yes (9) No Non Discrepent Condit6cn?(8) Yes O No ne.oiution roaman?O Yes @ No Pe var = owed?O Y= @ No

n. view

^= , " " : Not "= . ' Needed Date 3/12/98 Pnnted 3'13/96 9 52 31 AM Pope 2 or 3 i

l Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0840 j Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report VT Lead: Nui, Antony A O O O *1 =

VT Mgr: Schopfw, Don K B D D *1 m ste Chmn: Singh, Anand K oste: 3/12/98 sL comments: NU disposition is acceptable.

Based on the NU disposition, supporting documentation and review of the affected piping stress analyses, S&L agrees that the subject DR does not represent a discrepant condition. The 1 calculations did consider appropriate temperature ranges, and identified the worst case for respective conditions and correctly determined results.

i Printed 3/13/96 9:52:33 AM Page 3 of 3 l

l l

1 1

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0907 mmstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Configurobon DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED 1 Review Element: System Instonebon Diecipune:I & C Design Discrepancy Type: lm Irnplementenon O vos s,- _ . =: Hvx @h NRC F7 =- e level:4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdished.1/18/96 W . ii. Instrument installations not in accordance with design l documents and standards.

r+ During system wa kdowns the following installation discrepancies were discovered. These discrepancies have the potential of affecting the accuracy and performance of the associated equipment.

1. Electrical Installation Specification E350 Rev 9, paragraph 3.3.11.1 states

• Install a ground wire in parallel with the flexible conduit using approved bushing at each end. The ground wires j shall not be twisted or spiraled around the flexible conduit, and i shall be long enough to allow three inches of movement of one  ;

end of the flexible conduit relative to the other end, in any j direction.* Contrary to this requirement the following instruments do not have the necessary three inches of slack in the ground wire or the ground wire is disconnected: 3HVR*TS1, 3HVR*TS2A, 3HVR*TS3A, 3HVR*TS4, 3HVR*TSS, 3HVR*TS6, 3HVR*TS7, 3HVR*TS8, 3HVR*TE298, 3HVR*TS32A, 3HVR*TS32B, and 3HVR-TIS 109B.

2. Drawing 2472.710-392-519 Rev C, indicates the following instruments are installed in the referenced locations. Based on system walkdown of the cabinet, the correct modules do not appear to be installed at the specified location.

3HVP*TC29A, Nest 1, Slot 2 3HVR*TY45A11, Nest 2, Slot 7 3HVR*TY45A3, Nest 2, Slot 6 3HVR*TY45A4, Nest 2, Slot 5 3HVR*TY45AS, Nest 2, Slot 6 3HVR*TY45A8, Nest 2, Slot 5 3HVR*PY104A1, Nest 2, Slot 6 3HVR*TY45A, Nest 2, Slot 3 3HVR"TY45A12, Nest 4, Slot 4 in addition, an instrument card marked 3HVR*PDS2088 was  ;

observed in Nest 3, Slot 4. This instrument was to be removed j from its loop and discontinued as part of PDCR 92-103 which  !

removed it from panel 3CES*lPNLl21.

l

3. Drawing 2472.710-392 542 Rev B, indicates instruments  !

3HVR*TY45A13 (Nest 4, Slot 5) and 3HVR*TY45A14. (Nest 4, Slot 4),are installed in Pane' 3CES*lPNLl22. These instruments could not be located within this panel, at the specified locations, during system walkdowns.

1 The inetaft einn nf %IVR.pril?11 rinac nnt maat the Prinled 3/13/96 9:54:36 AM Page 1 of 5

Northecst Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0907 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report requirements of drawing 12179-BK-16D-72 Rev 1. The drawing calls for stainless steel tubing to be Installed and the current installed configuration has copper tubing. The tubing is routed through two penetrations,173 and 174, and the penetrations are sealed. The sealing material has shrunk such that a void is present thereby rendering the penetration seal inadequate.

5. Drawing 12179-EE-36FQ Rev 1 Indicates the model number for temperature switches 3HVR*TS175A1,3HVR*TS175A2, 3HVR*TS17581,3HVR*TS175B2,3HVR*TS177A, and 3HVR*TS177B is ASCO model SC11 AR. Based on system walkdowns, the actual model installed is SC11BR. PDDS also lists the model number as SC11AR.

6. Instrument installation Specification SP-EE-212 Rev 1, Paragraph 2-4 , requires that all threaded connections shall be sealed. Contrary to this requirement instruments 3HVR*FES2A and 3HVR*FE988 do not have sealing compound on their threaded connections and instrument FES2A can be rotated (i.e., is loose).

7. Drawing 2472.900-609-328 Rev B shows the model number for instrument 3HVR-TS109C to be United Electric 802P-5AS.

System walkdowns observed the installed model as 802P-5BS.

The following material conditions were noted during the system walkdowns; these are not configuration management issue.

1. One of the flow elements located on/with 3HVR*FLT3A, serial number 3058 no identification tag observed - is loose.

2. One of the flow elements located on/with 3HVR*FLT38, serial number 1861 no identification tag observed - is loose.

3. Electrical Installation Specification E350 Rev 9, requires that connections be tight. Contrary to this requirement the Litton-Veam connector at instrument 3HVR*TS175A2 is loose such that it can be tumed by hand.

4. Specification SP-EE-212 Rev 1 requires that instruments be securely mounted. Contrary to this requirement, instrument 3HVR-Tl166A is not property secured within the flange mount in l that the gauge and capillary sensing line tums and pulls readily.

Review vand Invand Needed Date i Initiator: Server, T. L B O O t/2/se VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A O O O '5S8 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K O O O 1/12/98 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K G O O 5/1*S8 Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION: Disposition:

Printed 3f13/96 9:54:40 AM Page 2 of 5

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR4P3-0907 Milestorm Unit 3 Discrepancy Report NU has concluded that items 5,6, and 7 in Disaepancy Report, DR-MP3-0907, have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU which require correction.

Item (5) Temperature switches 3HVR*TS175A1, 3HVR*TS175A2, 3HVR*TS175B1, 3HVR*TS175B2, 3HVR*TS177A and 3HVR*TS177B were walked down and vertfled to be ASCO type SC11BR, contrary to Drawing EE-36FQ, PDDS and PMMS. Therefore this is a discrepent condition and a DCN has been generated to corred the drawing, PMMS and PDDS have been updated.

Item (6) 3HVRTE52A and 3HVRTE988 were walked down and determined to be loose and no Grafoil tape was noted.

Therefore this is a discrepent condition and a AWO has been generated to correct this item.

Item (7) 3HVR-TIS 109C was walked down and determined to be United Electric type 802P-5BS, contrary to Drawing 2472.900-609-328 and PMMS/PDDS. Therefore this is a discrepant condition and a DCN has been generated to correct this item.

The material condition items are dispositioned as follows:

1). The instrument (3HVRTE88A) was walked down and determined to be loose and not ta00ed. Therefore this is a discrepant condition and a AWO has been generated to correct this item.

2). The instrument (3HVRTE888) was walked down and determined to be loose and not tag 0ed. Therefore this is a discrepant condition and a AWO has been generated to correct this item.

3). 3HVR*TS175A2 was walked down and determined to be loose. Therefore this is a discrepent condition and a AWO has  ;

been generated to corred this item.

l 4). 3HVR-Tl196A was walked down and determined to be loose in it's mounting. Therefore this is a discrepant condition and a AWO has been generated to correct this item.

Condition Report (CR) M3-98-0551 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve these issues. Approved Corrective Action Plan (attached), DCN DM3-00-0113-98, Work Orders AWO M3 98 02739 and AWO M3 98 2856 were issued to correct these discrepancies. These corrections will be completed prior startup.

NU bclieves that this DR is a Significance Level 4 discrepancy, I since the discrepent conditions have no impact on the design and/orlicense basis for the unit.

NU has concluded that items 1,2,3, and 4 issues reported in Discrepancy Report. DR-MP3-0979. do not represent discrepant Printed 3/13f98 9:54:41 AM Page 3 or 5

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 4907 milistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report conditions.

Item (1) This item discusses the Electrical Installation Spec E350 l requirement to have 3' allowable movement in the ground bond I for flex conduit. A walkdown of the 3HVR8TS1,3HVR*TS2A, 3HVR*TS3A, 3HVR*TS4, 3HVR*TSS, 3HVR*TS6, 3HVR*TS7, 3HVR*TS8,3HVP*TE298,3HVP*TS32A, and 3HVP*TS328 reveals that the ground bond is securely fastened to the flex conduit with tie wraps. The conduit does have sufficient extra length to allow for 3* of movement, therefore, the ground bond is of sufficient length. Therefore this is not a discrepant condition.

A field walkdown reveals that the ground cable for the flexible conduit connection to 3HVR-1098 is not connected. Therefore this is a discrepent condition. This issue has been addressed in M3-lRF-01410 (DR-MP3-0926, and completed by AWO M3 02932).

Item (2). This item discusses relays not found installed in 3CES*1PNL20 per SWEC drawing 2472.710-392 519, Rev C.

These instruments were removed under a work-in-progress job (DCN DM3-S-0256-96, see M3-lRF-00740) which was issued on 7/23/97 and completed on 10/23/97. A subsequent issue of this drawing, Rev D, was walked down and verified correct.

Therefore this is not a discrepant condition.

The DR lists 3HVP*TC29A as being discrepant, this is incorrect.

The proper module is installed in Nest 1, Slot 2. Therefore this is l not a discrepent condition.

]

Item (3) This item discusses relays not found installed in 3CES*lPNL22 per SWEC drawing 2472.710-392-542, Rev B.

These instruments were removed under a work-in-progress job ,

(DCR M3-96057, DCN DM3-S-0256-96, see M3-IRF-00740) which was issued on 7/23/97 and completed on 10/23/97. A subsequent issue of this drawing, Rev C, was walked down and verified corred. Therefore this is not a discrepant condition.

Item (4) Mechanical Design performed a walkdown of 3HVR-PDl211. The installation is in accordance with BK-16D-72.

There is no copper tubing installed. Stainless steel tubing is installed per the drawing. The seal through penetration 173-3 is satisfactorily installed as well. Therefore this is not a discrepant condition and this item is considered closed.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that items 5,6, and 7 in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0907, have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU which require correction.

Conditon Report (CR) M3-98-0551 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve these issues. Approved Corrective Action Plan (attached), DCN DM3-00-0113-98, Work Ostlers AWO M3 98 02739 and AWO M3 98 2856 were issued to Printed 3/13/96 9:54:42 AM Page 4 of 5

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0907 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report correct these discrepancies. These corrections will be completed prior startup.

NU has concluded that items 1, 2, 3, and 4 issues reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0979, do not represent discrepant conditions. Design Engineering reviewed and verified the field condition and found no changes are required by these issues.

NU believes that this DR is a Significance Level 4 discrepancy, since the discrepant conditions have no impact on the design ,

and/orlicense basis for the unit. I

.~..1z'; klennaed by NU7 Q Yes @ No NonmacrepentConenon?O Yes @ No n iunon Pen e n ,7 0 vos @ No nosonsonune.ooe=d70 vos @ No )

m , m ,y ^=fdh Not A=r*h Needed Date l VT L.ed: Neri. Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Dete: 3/12/98 3 st comments: NU appears to have inadvertantly referenced DR-MP3-0979 in I response to items 1,2,3 and 4. This appears to be a l typo 0raphical error which should be DR-MP3-0907. No response is required.

)

l Printed 3/13/96 9M43 AM Pope 5 of 5

1 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0943 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Syelem DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED 1 Review Element: System Design re_- . my Type: Coloulation O vee SystemProcess: DGX g

NRC Significence level: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdished. 1/18516 rez . y: No analysis to backup statement in SER about DG operation {

while sprinklers are operating Description Per Letter B10850 dated August 1,1983, NU stated in a response to a request for additional information (Response to Question Q410.17) that "the diesel engine systems and auxiliary equipment are designed to start and maintain full load output with the fire protection sprinkler system operating. There will be no significant accumulation of water within the building to affect safety related equipment since the building is located on Grade elevation and water will adequately drain to the outside through the doors and floor drains." There is no other documentation, calculation or analysis that could be found to back up this statement.

Review Velid invalid Needed Date initiator: Leuni. C. M. O O O 1/55'6 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony ^ O O O 1/8'S8 L

VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 8 0 0 1/125i6 i IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K B O O 1/15'88 Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/11/98 RESOLUTION: Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0943, has identifed a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. This discrepancy meets the criteria specified in NRC letter B16901 and 17010. It has been screened per U3 PI-20 criteria and found to have no operability or reportability concems and meets the Unit 3 deferral criteria. CR M3-98-0653 has been written to develop and track resolution of this item per RP-4.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0943, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. This discrepancy meets the criteria specified in NRC letter B16901 and 17010. It has been screened per U3 PI-20 criteria and found to have no operability or reportability concems and meets the Unit 3 deferral criteria. CR M3-98-0653 has been written to develop and track resolution of this item per RP-4.

. ... o'ii dentiaed try Nu? O Yes @ No Non Discrepent Condition?O Yes (e) No Printed 3/13516 9M27 AM Pege 1 or 2 1

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR-MP3-0943 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report P-% P-m e70 va @= P-% un, d70 v. @m I n

Ir2:letor: Leuni, C. M. . M h Needed M 4 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A G O O *1

• I VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K B O O Si m IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O wi m Date:

O O 4 3/11/98 st Comments: The NU response is acceptable. The recommened corrective action is to add this DR to CR M3-98-0138. This is the CR to review all design basis calculation DRs. This is acceptable.

I l

Printed W1396 9:55:30 AM Page 2 of 2

Northeast Utiilties ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0963 Ministone Unn 3 Discrepancy Report '

Review Group: Connguratkm DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: System Design Discipline: Electrical Des:gn W my Type: Drawing Om i Sy: . =: HVX gg NRC Signiacancelevel: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Publiehod 1/25/98

m. :y. Nameplate data differences.

Deecription: The following difference in vendor data from drawings and specifications as compared with the nameplate data on the installed components were noted.

Item 1 Specification 12179-2472.900-594 (sheet reference and revision as noted) indicates that the power consumption for the below listed motor operated dampers is 225VA. PDDS indicate a load current of 1.9 amps. Based on the rated voltage of 120 Vac this value is consistent. However, the nameplate data for each of the motors indicates that the load current is 2.35 amps, therefore power consumption may be higher than that provided by the vendor in the specification.

3HVR* MOD 288; Sheet A2-8, Rev. 2 3HVR* MOD 49A; Sheet A2-32, Rev. 3 3HVR* MOD 49C1; Sheet A2-34, Rev. 3  !

3HVR* MOD 50A; Sheet A2-36, Rev. 3 3HVR* MOD 50B; Sheet A2-37, Rev. 3 3HVR* MOD 50C1; Sheet A2-38, Rev. 3 3HVR* MOD 50C2; Sheet A2-39, Rev. 3 ltem 2 Specification 12179-2472.900-594 Indicates that the power consumption for the below listed motor operated dampers is 225VA. PDDS indicate a load current of 1.9 amps. Based on the rated voltage of 120 Vac this value is consistent. However, the nameplate data for each of the motors indicates that the load current is 2.0 amps, therefore power consumption may be higher than that provided by the vendorin the specification.

3HVP* MOD 23B; Sheet A2-107, Rev.1 3HVP* MOD 20A; Sheet A2-100, Rev.1 3HVP* MOD 20C; Sheet A2-102 Rev.1 Item 3 Specification 12179-2472.900-594 page A2-17, Rev. 2, indicates that the power consumption for the SOV associated with 3HVR*AOD39A is 17.4 watts. However, the nameplate data for the solenoid indicates 17.5 watts.

Printed 3/13/98 9.57:29 AM Page 1 or 6

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR.MP3 4963 Minstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report item 4 Specification 12179-2472.900-594, on the indicated pages, provide the model numbers for the below listed dampers. The field verification noted the identified differences in the model numbers.

3HVR*AOD398 Specification 12179-2472.900-594, Pa0e A2-18, Rev. 2, indicates the SOV is Catalog Number NPK8320A182E; nameplate data indicates Catalog Number NPL8321 A1E.

3HVR*AOD43A i

Specification 12179-2472.900-594, Page A2-23, Rev. 2, indicates the SOV is Catalog Number NPK8320A182E; nameplate data indicates Catalog Number NPL8321 A1E.

3HVR*AOD438 Specification 12179-2472.900-594, Page A2-40, Rev. 2, indicates the SOV is Catalog Number NPK8320A182E; nameplate data indicates Catalog Number NPL8321 A1E.

3HVR*AOD658 Specification 12179-2472.900-594, Page A2-41, Rev. 3, indicates the SOV is Catalog Number NPK8320A182E; nameplate data indicates Catalog Number NPL8321 A1E.

Review vand InveNd Needed Date Initiator: Server, T. L G O O sissies VTt.eed: Nort. Anthony A B O O 1/ 4/88 VT Mgr: Schopper, Don K G O O it eies IRC Chmn: Skylh, Anand K G O O ir22/se Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy report DR-MP3-0963, items 1 & 2, has identified conditions not previously identified by NU which require correction. CR M3-98-0718 has been written to develop the corrective actions associated with the DR. NU has concluded that DR-MP3-0983, items 3 & 4, has identified conditions that are not considered to be discrepant.

The scope of the DCN and CCN willinclude the opposite train components to those listed in the DR/CR. Items 1 and 2 are considered discrepent conditions not previously identified by NU which require correction. CR M3-98-0718 has been written to Printed 3/13/9e 9.57:33 AM Pepe 2 of 6

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0963 ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report develop the corrective actions associated with these issues.

A DCN will be issued against Specification 12179-2472.900-594 to refied the nameplate data as described in items #1 and #2 of CR M3-96-0718.

A CCN will be issued against Calculation #154E to correct the loading values used for the equipment described in items #1 and

1. 2 of CR-M3-96-0718.

In addition the MODS listed in items 1 & 2, and their opposite train components, all other MODS in Spec 12179-2472.900-594 will be investigated, and corrections to Calc #s' 154E, and the 1 Specification will be made as required. A spot check of 4 MODS j in Spec 12179-2472.900-594 that were not included in the scope of DR-MP3-0963, either specifically or by opposite train association, showed that the same discrepancy existed (3HVR* MOD 728, 3HVZ* MOD 20A, & 3HVZ* MOD 21 A/B). For the non-safety related MODS in the specification, a CCN will be issued against Calc Nos'.181E and NL-015, as necessary. A spot check of 3 of the non-safety related dampers showed that the nameplate rating of 2.0A @ 120V is consistent with the Specification Data Sheets,240VA @ 120V, and PDDS,1.9A @

120V (3HVZ-MOD 22, & 3HVZ-MOD 23A/B)

Item 1:

This item indicates a difference in load current values between the Plant Design Data System (PDDS) and the nameplate date for damper motors. 3HVR* MOD 288, 49A, 49C1, 50A, 50C1 &

50C2. The value of 1.9ampes in the Purchase Specification Data Sheets agrees with the value in PDDS. The nameplate data for each of the motors indicates that the load current is 2.35 amps.

The Load Current used in Calculation # 154E, " Panel loading for Class 1E Distribution Panels" uses the value for the PDDS/ Purchase Spec Data Sheets item 2:

This item indicates a difference in load current values between the Plant Design Data System (PDDS) and the nameplate date for damper motors 3HVP* MOD 238,20A & 20C. The value of 1.9 amps in the Purchase Specification Data Sheets agrees with the value in PDDS. The nameplate data for each of the motors  !

indicates that the load current in 2.00 amps. The Load Current I used in Calculation # 154E," Panel loading for Class 1E Distribution Panels" uses the value for the PDDS/ Purchase Spec Data Sheets. i These discrepancies are minor and do not affect the conclusions j of the calculation. Calculation 97-ENG-01512E3, Rev. O, uses inrush current to determine equipment operability under minimum voltage conditions. The additional load added to the vital panels by using nameplate date is inconsequential next to the capacity margin that presently exists, so there are no licensing or design basis concoms. Therefore, NU considers DR-MP3-0963 to be a Significance Level 4, and the CCN and DCN to Calculation # 154E and Specification 12179-2472.900-594 ,

Printed 3/13/98 9:57:34 AM Page 3 or 6

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR 4BP34963 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report respectively, will be deferred until after unit restart. In addition, any revision required to load calculations # 181E and NL-015, for the non-vital panels, will be deferred until after unit restart.

NU has concluded that DR-MP3-0063, items 3 & 4, has identified conditions that are not considered discrepant.

Item 3:

This item indicates a difference in power consumption values between Specification 12179-2472.900-594 and the nameplate 3 data for the SOV associated with damper 3HVR*AOD39A. The Specification indicates that power consumption for this SOV is 17.4 watts. The item states that nameplate data for the solenoid indicates 17.5 watts. The vendor catalog for this SOV indicates that the power consumption is 17.4 watts. Field walkdown of this damper, plus 3HVR*AOD398, shows that they are equipped with ASCO solenoids, Model No. NPL8321 A1E, with a namepiste rating of 17.4 watts, not 17.5 as the DR states. These solenoids, along with a number of others, were recently replace with the model now installed by DCNs DM3-00-0615-97, DM3-00-0121-97, and DMS-00-1492-96. The solenoid that was replaced, ASCO model No. NPK8320A182E, also has a nameplate rating of 17.4 watts.

item 4:

This item indicates a difference in'model numbers between Specification 12179-2472.900-594 and the nameplates for the SOVs associated with dampers 3HVR*AOD398,43A,438, &

658. The specification ind6 cates that the model number of these SOVs is NPK8320A182E. The nameplates for these SOVs indicates tl.at the model number is NPL8321 A1E. The SOVs i associated with dampers 3HVR*AOD398,43A,438, & 658 were recently replaced with new SOVs with the model number MPL8321 A1E por DCR M3-97029. The required field work in accordance with DCNs DM3-00-0615-97, DMS-00-0121-97, and DM3-00-1492-96 is complete and property reflected in GRITS l and includes an update to Specification 12179-2472.900-594 to include the new model number for these SOVs.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy report DR-MP3-0963, items 1 & 2, has identified conditions not previously identified by NU which require correction. CR M3-98-0718 corrective actions will correct Specification 12179-2472.900-594 and Calculation

1. 154E to refied tne correct loading values. NU has concluded that Discrepancy Repo 1 DR-MP3-0963, items 3 & 4, has identified conditions that are not considered to be discrepent.

Items 1 & 2, has identified conditions not previously identified by NU which require corredion. CR M3-98-0718 has been wrhten to develop the correction actions associated with the DR.

Calculation # 154E," Panel Loading for Class 1E Distribution Panels" uses the Specification Data Sheet power consumption (VA) information to determine panel loadina. Althouah this Prtnied 3/13/96 9:57:35 AM Page 4 of 6

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0963 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report loading information is not in agreement with the nameplate date, sufficient panel capadty exists such that the additional load that would be added by using the nameplate data, would be inconsequential to the calculation condusion. Calculation 97-ENG-01512EE, " Vendor Calculation on 120V ac SCV Panels Device Volta 0e Calculatiosf, which determines if acceptable voltage exits at the terminals of the devices under minimum supply voltage conditions, uwes equipment inrush current to calculate voltage drop. Therefore, there are no licensing or design basis concems.  !

I in addition the MODS listed in items 1 & 2, and their opposite I train components, all other MODS in Spec 12179-2472.900-594 I will be investi0sted, and corrections to Calc #s' 154E, and the Specification will be made as required. A spot check of 4 MODS in Spec 12179-2472.900-594 that were not induded in the scope of DR-MP3-0963, either specifically or by opposite train association, showed that the same discrepancy existed (3HVR* MOD 72B, 3HVZ' MOD 20A, & 3HVZ* MOD 21 A/B). For the non-safety related MODS in the specification, a CCN will be issued against Calc Nos'.181E and NL-015, as necessary. A spot check of 3 of the non-safety related dampers showed that the nameplate rating of 2.0A O 120V is consistent with the Specification Data Sheets,240VA @ 120V, and PDDS,1.9A @

120V. (3HVZ-MOD 22, & 3HVZ-MOD 23A/B)

These discrepancies are minor and do not affect the conclusions of the calculation. Inrush current is used to determine equipment operability under minimum voltage conditions for the devices on the 1E panels, so there are no licensing or design basis concems. The add 4ional load added to the vital panels by using nameplate date is inconsequential next to the capacity margin that presently exists. Therefore, NU considers DR-MP3-0963 to be a Significance Level 4, and the CCN and DCN to Calculation

1. 154E and Specification 12179-2472.900-594 respectively, will be deferred until after unit restast. In addition, any revision required to load calculations # 181E and NL-015, for the non-vital panels, will be deferred until after unit restart.

Items 3 and 4 are not considered by NU to be discrepant coMitions:

Item 3 indicates a difference in power consumption values between Specification 12179-2472.900-594 and the nameplate data for the SOV associated with damper 3HVR*AOD39A of 0.1 j watts. (17.4 vs.17.5 watts respectively). The vendor catalog for this SOV indicates that the power consumption is 17.4 watts.

Field walkdown of this damper, plus 3HVR*AOD398, shows that they are equipped with ASCO solenoids, Model No.

NPL8321 A1E, with a nameplate rating of 17.4 watts, not 17.5 as the DR states.

Item 4 indicates a difference in model numbers between Specification 12179-2472.900-594 and the nameplates for the  !

SOVs associated with dampers 3HVR*AOD398,43A,438, &

658. The specification indicates that the model number of these PrNed 3/13/96 9.57:36 AM PeGe 5 of 6

Northeast Utinties ICAVP DR No. DR44P3-0963 minstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report SOVs is NPK8320A182E. The nameplates for these SOVs indicates that the model number is NPL8321 A1E. They were recently replace per DCR M3-97029. The required field work in accordance with DCNs DM3-00-0615-97, DM3-00-0121-97, and DM3-00-1492-96 is complete and properiy reflected in GRITS and includes an update to Specification 12179-2472.900-594 to ,

include the new model number for these SOVs. l Significance Level criteria does not apply as these are not discrepant conditions.  ;

7../ r?; adentified by Nur O Yes @ No Non Diecrepent Condition 70 Yes @ No l n wi nP.ndins70 va @ No = e une.e m .d7 0 v a @ No j n.wi Initiator: Womer. l.

VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 4 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anend K Dete: 1 st Comments:

Printed 3712V96 9:57;37 AM Page 6 of 6

NortheOst Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0986 millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Syelem DR RESOumoN ACCEPTED ReviewElement MoencelionDesign

""'P""*:""**"'"" O y=

F-- -p Type: NW Syseommocess: NEW @h NRC SigntAconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:

ossepulmehed 1 5 98 Discrepancy: Calculation P(B)-1001, Rev 0 CCN 3 and CCN 4 Description' During review of Calculation Change Number 3 and 4 to calculat!on P(B)-1001, Rev. 0 ' Heat Loads for the ESF Building Emergency HVAC Systems' the following discrepancies were identified:

Calculation Change Number 3:

1) On page 6, data item #1; a sump water temperature of 215'F based on reference 5 (calc US(B)-356, Rev.1) is used. This is in conflict with the 260*F sump water temperature stated in Safety Evaluation S3-EV-97-0045 prepared for DCR M3-96054,

2) On page 6 & 7, data item #2; uses a 230*F water temperature downstream of the safety injection pumps. This does not agree with page 92 of reference 5 that states that the temperature downstream of the safety injection pump is 240 'F.

(

3) On page 7, assumption #2; assumes that piping temperature

]

will approach 230*F. This does not agree with the 260*F stated '

In Safety Evaluation S3-EV-97-0045 item 1.1

4) Page 8 ; piping heat losses need to be recalculated using the higher pipe temperatures noted in Safety Evaluation S3-EV 0045.

5) Page 8, calc for 10" line with 1.5" of encapsulated insulation and 8" line with 2" of encapsulated insulation; states room temperature is 120*F but uses room temperature of 110*F when adjusting heat loss.-

6) Page 9, item 7 & Table 5; Heat gain of 14,430 Btu /hr for ACUS 2NB fan heat gain (page 65 of original calc) needs to be added to totals shown in Table 5 for rooms 1 A & 1B Calculation Change Number 4:

1) On page 5 of CCN, item 2; the CCP leaving RHS heat exchanger water temperature of 142*F does not agree with reference 3 (SGCS Calc #95-052 Rev A). With a 115 'F CCP temperature entering the RHS heat exchanger, the leaving i temperature is approximately 150 'F . The 142*F temperature used in the calculation appears to be based on a 109 - 110 'F ,

CCP temperature.

2) On page 6 of CCN, a two foot floor thickness was used for area 4E. Drawing EC-328-7 shows the floor thickness as three feet. Using the three foot thickness increases the R-value and reduces the heat transfer thru the floor.

Printed 3/13418 9:58.26 AM Pope 1 of 3

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR WIP34986 milistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report

3) On page 6 of CCN, a value of 0.68 was used for the surface conductance (still air film) for the wall and floor. It should have been used only for the wall. The surface conductance (still air film) for heat flow down thru the floor is 0.92. This increases the R-value and reduces the heat transfer thru the floor.

4) Calculation assumes a ground temperature of 50 *F. Based on review of average earth temperatures on paDe 11.4 of the 1991 ASHRAE Applications Handbook, a ground temperature around 70'F would be a more appropriate assumption. This reduces the available temperature difference from 54 to 34 *F for a 104*F room desi0n temperature.

5) Page 5 of CCN refers to a Reference 5. There is not a reference 5 identified in the reference section of the CCN.

6) In Table 3 for the 1st 24" line in room 2A and 2B, the linear foot factor from Tath 2 should be 6.283 instead of the 6.383 used.

Review Valid invalid Needed Date ine.ior: siout.u.D. O O O mee VT Lead: Nerl. Anthony A B O O si21/se VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O tr22/se IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O i22/se Date:

INVAUD:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION NU has detennined that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0986 has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction.

CCN 3, item 1. The 260' F. sump water temperature is for the large break LOCA case which is not the limiting case for cold leg recirculation. A small break LOCA and correspondinD 230' F. is the highest temperature RSS water circulated. Therefore, for calculation purposes, the temperature used is correct.

CCN 3, item 2. This is an error. The calculation says S1 Pumps, but should say RSS Pumps.

CCN 3, item 3. See item 1.

! CCN 3, item 4. See item 1.CCN 3, item 5. This is a calc. error.

! The conect room temperature is 110' F.

CCN 3, item 6. This is a calc. error. The fan heat gains should be included in totals for rooms 1 A and 1B.

CCN 4, item 1. This is a calc. error. The RHS HX leaving water temp. will be reconciled with calc. SGCS95-052, Rev. A CCN 4, item 2. This is a calc. error. Floor is three feet Printed 3/139e 9:5e:29 AM Page 2 or 3

Northeast Utmties ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0986 ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report thick.CCN 4, item 3. This is a calc. error. S&L comment is correct.

CCN 4, item 4. The value from ASHRAE is an annual integrated value from the surface to 10 feet below the ground. This assumption is for all walls and floors greater than 10 feet below the Ground. We consider this a valid assumption.

CCN 4, item 5. This as a calc. error. Correct reference is 4.

CCN 4, item 6. This is a calc. error. S&L comment is correct.

Note that this error results in a more conservative result.

NU has written CR-M3-98-0647 to address the errors listed above. The approved corrective action will correct these mistakes, post startup. The corrections will not affect the conclusions of calculation P(B)-1001. These discrepancies do not affect licensing basis / design basis. NU considers this issue a Significance Level 4.

Attachments: CR M3-98-0647 with approved corrective action plan Premoudy klontined by NU7 U vos @ No NonDiecrepentCondition?O vos @ No n=* tion PendinstO v. @ u. munradad70 va @ No

n. view initiator: Slout. M. D.

VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A vrm r: 8 O O =

e schapter, con x IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K oste: 3/12/98 st Comments: Discrepancy is classified as a Level 4 discrepancy. The existing cooling systems have sufficient margin to account for the increase in cooling loads when the calculation are corrected.

I I

Printed 3/13/98 9:58:31 AM Page 3 or 3 i

l i

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR.MP3-1001 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR REscumoN ACCEPTED Review Element: Corrective Action Process Diecipline. Mechanical Design th , J Type: Corrective Action implementation O **

8,_ X = :NEW g i NRC sagsdacancelevel: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putnished. 2/19/96 r1 , zy: UIR 970 is not implemented as stated in the Discrepancy Closure Request Description' FSAR CR 97-MP3-82 resolves all issues identified in UIR 970.

However, the Discrepancy Closure Requests identifies changes to FSAR Table 6.2-62 that are not implemented in FSAR CR 97-MP3-82. These are:

1. Under

• Quench Spray Pump Check Valve Sticks Closed",

the Closure Request states that FSAR Table 6.2-62 is modified to remove references to testing the subject valve.

FSAR CR 97-MP3-82 changed Table 6.2-82 to read,

" Valve is checked periodically", deleting the following phrase,'during normal operation." The Closure Request does not identify any procedures or surveillances that  ;

test the quench spray pump check valves for sticking.

Therefore, a procedure cannot be confirmed to exist i which periodically verifies that the subject check valves do not to stick closed.

2. Under " Recirculation Spray Cooler Tube /Shell Rupture",

I the Closure Request states that FSAR Table 6.2-62 is modified to show that the coolers are designed to ASME lli Class 2 for the tube side and ASME Ill Class 3 for the shell side. FSAR CR 97-MP3-82 identifies the cooler as being designed to ASME lil Class 2. This is incorrect because the Table is refering to a rupture of the tube side or the shell l side, i and the shell side is designed to Class 3. ,)

Review j invalid Vaud Needed Date initiator: Feingold. D. J. O O O 2/3/98 VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A O Q Q 2/3/96 vr ugr: senopr.r Don x 0 0 0 2/12/98 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O r>14'88 Date:

mvAuD:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1001, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. A change to FSAR Table 6.2-62 as described in FSARCR 97-MP3-82 does not fully resolve the Discrepancy Closure Request for UIR 970. Specifically, the FSAR Table 6.2-62 section conceming the tube or shell rupture Printed 3f13/9810:01:24 AM Page 1 or 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1001 milistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report of Containment Recirculation Spray Coolers needs to be revised to reflect the heat exchanger shell is ASME lil, code class 2 and the tube side is ASME lil, code class 3. The Table 6.2-62 section for Quench Spray Pump Check Valve cannot be revised to indicate the check valve opening is verified when the pumps are surveillance tested since the check valves are not in the flow path. There is no normal flow through these check valves. Thus redundancy is relied upon to ensure at least one swing check valve will function as presently stated in the FSAR table. The change to the FSAR will be made prior to mode 4 in accordance with the approved Corrective Action Plan for CR M3-98-0976.

The UIR packa0e willlikewise be revised before startup. The Significance Level is concluded to be Level 4 since there is no impact on LB or DB or plant equipment.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1001, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. FSAR Table 6.2-62 will be revised prior to mode 4 to property designate the ASME code classifications for the Recirculation Spray Cooler Tube /Shell rupture in accordance with the approved corrective action plan for CR M3-98-0976.

Likewise UIR-970 package will be revised prior to startup. The Significance Level is concluded to be Level 4 since there is no impact on LB or DB or plant equipment.

. .. 2, hientised by Nu? O Yes @ No NonDiscrepentcondition?Q Yes (9) No PM% Pending70 v @ No P - % unt sved7 0 ve. @ No Review initiator: Feingold, D. J.

VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schapter, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O Date:

alComments:

I l

l l

)

l l

l Printed 3/134610:0127 AM Page 2 of 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1013 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: Modtheshon Design Diecipenr MechanicalDwign N e- . :p Type: NW SystemProcess: NEW g

NRC Signinconce level: NA Date faxed to NU:

Date Pubbehed 2M98

~- i. Affected Calculations List for DCR M3-97045 DescrtP tion: Calculation US(B)-303, Rev. O, " Decay Heat," is included in the list of affected calculations discussed on p. 25 of DCR M3-97045, Rev. O, "RSS Pump Restriction Orificies to Prevent Suction Line Flashing." Calculation US(B)-363 should not have been included in this list.

The decay heat calculation provides input to calculations which are affected by the reduction in RSS design flow, but the calculation which identifies the design basis decay heat curves is not affected by the reduction of the RSS design flow.

This DR addresses a programmattic issue rather than a technical deficiency.

Review vand inveNd Needed Date Initiator: Wakeland, J. F.

O O O 2/2/98 VT Leed: Nwl, Anthony A O D D 2t2/se VT Mgr: schopfw, Don K B D O 2t2/se IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K G O O 2rarse Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION. DISPOSITION:

NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1013, does not represent a discrepant condition. The list refered to in this DR is simply text describing what the subject calculation provides thereby indicating it's relationship to the design change. It is documented in the " Supporting Design  ;

Change Package Details" section of the DCR for information only and is not intended nor does it indicate that it is affected by this change.

S!gnificance 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-MP3-1013, does not represent a discrepant condition. The  ;

list refered to in this DR is simply text describing what the '

subject calculation provides thereby indicating it's relationship to the design change. It is documented in the " Supporting Design  !

Change Package Details" section of the DCR for information  !

Printed 3/13/9810:02:14 AM Pope 1 of 2 i l

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1013 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report only and is not intended nor does it indicate that it is affected by this change.

Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepent condition.

Previously identined by NU7 O Yes (e) No NonDiecrepentCondition?(9) Yes U No n olutionPoneng?O vos @ No m unresoeved7 0 vos @ No n.wi Initiator: Wakeland, J. F.

VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date: 3/12/98 st Comments: The quality issues for revising calculations for a design change are revising calculations which require change correctly, idenifying all affected calculations in the DCR reference list, and discussing the calculation conclusions in the modification's safety evaluations,if they are relevent.

S&L agrees that including or excluding a calculation from the discussion of affected calculations in the text of a DCR is not a quality issue and should not have been considered a discrepancy for the ICAVP.

Printed 3/13/9810:02:17 AM Page 2 of 2 i

I

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1035 millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR REsoll/ Tion ACCEPTED Review Element: ModiHcemon De@

Diocepene: Mechanical De*

E- , -i Type: Component Date O vee systemprocess: NEW g IStC signiecencelevel: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Published: 2/12/e6

-1: DCR M3-96054 & DCN DM3-S-517-96 do not contain/ reference Henry Pratt Company certification.

Description:

Modification DCR M3-96054 increases the design temperature of containment recirculation spray system (RSS) components to 260 degrees Fahrenheit in order to accomodate a loss of service water to the RSS heat exchangers during a design basis accident. DCN DM3-S-324 96 provides justification to raise the design temperature of valves 3RSSWOV20A,B,C,D. The DCN states that the higher design temperature has been certifkxi by the valve vendor, Henry Pratt Company. However, no certification document is referenced or attached to the DCN or design package.

Review Ve5d invegd Needed Date J Initiator: Feingold, D. J.

O O O 2rsos VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A B D '

O 2rsies vT Mer: schopsor, Don x utC Chmn: Singh, Anand K B O O 2resos j

G O O 2rr/se Date:

INVALID:

Date: 3/9/98 Resolution. Disposition:

NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1035, does not represent a discrepant condition. The ce6tification documents are referenced on page 2 of 6 of DCN DM3-S-0517-96. The valve manufacture's (Henry Pratt Company) approval for the higher temperature for the valve body can be found in the attached valve specification number 2362 200 164. The seat material (Buna N) has been reviewed for the stated desi0n conditions per the attached memorandum (NME-WM-97-032) from R. Y. Schone:Jarg (NME-Welding &

Materials) to M. Lynch dated January 31,1997 concluding that the rise in the peak temperature will have no appreciable effect on the Buna "N" seats of the subject valves.

(Note: DCN DM3-S-324 96 concems the re-rating of the RSS coolers. The DCN of interest is DCN DM3-O-517-96, which addresses the re-rate of these valves.)

Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepard condition.

Conclusion:

Printed 3/13/e810:03:17 AM Page 1 or 2  !

o

l Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1035 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-1035, does not represent a discrepant condition. The certification documents are referenced on page 2 of 6 of DCN DM3-S-0517-96. A copy of the valve specification number 2362-200164 and the seat material evaluation are attached for your information and review. Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.

Pr.viously idennaed by NU? O Yes @ No Non M , -

Condluon?U Yes @ No n sunonP.nena70 v @ No p-**, un, wv.d70 v @ No

n. view

~

Inluetor: Feingold. D. J.

VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT M9r: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date: 3/4/98  ;

at Comnwnts: DCN DM3-S-0517-96 changes design temperature for valves I 3RSS*MOV20A,B,C,D. I Memorandum (NME WM-97-032) from R. Y. Schonenberg (NME-WeldinD & Materials) to M. Lynch dated January 31,1997 and stress report D0057-2 (attached to specification 2362-200-164),

are not specifically referenced or included in DCN DM3-S-0517-

96. DCN DM3-S-0517-96 only states that the higher temperature has been certified by the valve manufacturer. This is the basis in the DCR for the acceptablility of the increased des 10 n temperature, i Memorandum NME WM-97-032 is an intemal Northeast Utilities memo addressing the impact of the temperature increase on the Buna N seals in the subject valves. Both the stress report and the intemal memo show that the subject valves are adequate for the increased temperature. However, no vendor certification is provided as stated in the DCN, and no evaluation for the impact of the temperature increase on the subject valves is included in the DCN. At a minumum, memorandum NME WM-97-032 and stress report D0057-2 should be referenced in DCN DM3-S-0517-96 as the basis for the acceptablilty of the increased design temperature for the subject valves.

l l

Printed 3/13/9610:03:21 AM Pape 2 of 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1040 Millstorm Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Pmgrammatic DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element Correceve Action Process Olocropency Type: Corrective Action implementation O vee Syster,#rocese: RSS g

NRC Signi#cence level: 4 Date faxed to NU:

Date Putdished 2/12/98 oiscrepancy: UIR 1907 Closure Package implementation is insufficient.

Description:

The closure is insufficient for the following reasons:

1) The ILRT Valve Lineup Procedure SP 31104, Rev. O, Attachment 4 (page 32) has not been updated as it stilllists the Recirculation Spray Suction Penetrations 102,103,104 and 105 as well as the Recirculation Spray Discharge Penetrations 107, 108,109 and 110 as vented systems while the updated FSAR Table 6.2-70 has clarified that no venting or draining is required for these systems.

2) The basis for the ILRT Valve Lineup Procedure SP 31104, Rev. O, Attachment 4 (page 32) is listed as updated FSAR Table 6.5-70 whereas it should be FSAR Table 6.2 70.

NOTE: SP 31104, Rev. C. m;e 8 t,tates no draining is required for RSS pene'3 '>n 9.y.103,104,105,107,108,109 and 110 which is consisteTq . "" :'.,u updated FSAR Table 6.2-70.

Review vand invoud Needed Date initletor: Caruso, A.

O O O 2/398 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomes J B O O 2tase VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K B O O 2 98 IRC Chmn: Sin 0h, Anand K B O O 2trise Date:

IWAUD:

Date: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION. Disposition:

NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1040, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which has been corrected. SP 31104 Rev.1 was issued 12/28/97. Revision 1 to the prc::edure corrects the requirements for penetrations 102,103,104,105,107,108,109 and 110 and makes them consistent with the updated FSAR Table 6.2 70. Revision 1 to the Basis Document has also addressed and eliminated the typographical error on Attachment 4 by relying solely on the information contained in Attachment 2 to align the various penetrations. SP 31104 Rev.1 is attached.

ACRs M3-96-0114 and M3-96-0446 initiated reviews and assessments of the Leak Rate testing procedure and valve alignments. The results of these reviews lead to revision of the SP 31104.

Printed 3r139810:03:58 AM Page 1 of 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1040 Millstene Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Significance level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.

Conclusion:

MU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1040, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which has been corrected. SP 31104 Rev.1 was issued 12/28/97. Revision 1 to the procedure corrects the requirements for penetrations 102,103,104,105,107,108,109 and 110 and makes them consistent with the updated FSAR Table 6.2-70. Revision 1 to the Basis Document has also addressed and eliminated the typographical error on Attachment 4 by relying solely on the information contained in Attachment 2 to align the various penetrations. SP 31104 Rev.1 is attached.

ACRs M3-96-0114 and M3-96-0446 initiated reviews and assessments of the Leak Rate testing procedure and valve alignments. The results of these reviews lead to revision of the SP 31104.

Significance level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.

Attachments - SP 31104 Rev.1, ACR M3-96-0114, ACR M3 0446 Pr.viously identened by NU? @ Y.s O No Non Diecrepent Comittion?O Y.s @ No n iuisonP.adinerO v= @ No n iunonunr.coev.d70 va @ No

n. view initiator: Coruso, A.

VT Leed: Ryan, Thomas J VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date: 3/12/98 st. Comments: Based on the attached ILRT Valve Lineup Surveillance Procedure SP 31104, Rev.1, the inconsistency between the ILRT Valve Lineup Surveillance Procedure SP 31104 and the updated FSAR Table 6.2-70 has been eliminated as it pertained to the venting requirements for the Recirculation Spray Suction Penetrations 102,103,104 and 105 as well as for the Recirculation Spray Discharge Penetrations 107,108,109 and i 110. In addition, Procedure SP 31104, Rev.1 addressed the typographical error as it pertained to FSAR Table 6.2-70.

l I

l Printed 3/1T9tl10:04:00 AM Pope 2 of 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1012 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION REXCTED Review Element: Change Process Diecipline. Mechanical Design O' -n :y Type: Corrective Action implementshon Ow System / Process: DGX g

NRC S; =--c.e level: 4 Date faxed to h"J:

Date Published: 2/12/9e Discrepency: Discrepancy in UIR 1298 Closure Package

Description:

While reviewing the UIR 1298 Implementation package the following discrepancy was noted:

The approved Closure Request Report for UIR 1298, dated 8/01/97, states in Conclusion that "The design document has been identified that shows the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head. FSAR has been annotated (see enclosed annotated page) with the applicable design document referenced." The UIR 1298 Implementation Package contained a copy of FSAR Table 9.5-9, dated December 1994, which is assumed to be the reason for the Unresolved item Report. Also enclosed with the implementation Package is a copy of FSAR Table 9.5-9, page 1 of 3, dated March 1997 which we believe is intended to provide the resolution to the condition describe in the UIR. This copy has no annotations for the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head. No other FSAR pa0es were included with the implementation Package. Thus, it could not be independently verified that a reference design document for the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head was identified and the FSAR was annotated with an applicable design document referenced.

Review Valid invalid Needed Date initietor: obersnet,Bojea-B O O 2sse VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A O O O 2/3/96 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O 2sse IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O 2/7/98 Date:

INVAUD:

Dete: 3/12/98 RESOLUTION Disposition:

NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1012, does not represent a discrepant condition. A review of the current annotated FSAR Table 9.5-9 shows that the reference for the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head is the Colt Operating Instruction Manual (OlM) 241-001 A, Dwg. No.11910 288. A review of the current manual does indicate the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head specifications on drawing 11910 288. The DICP for UIR 1298 is correct as written. The copy of the March 1997 FSAR shows the current version of the FSAR as indicated and confirms the values are unchanged as a result of the annotation effort. The annotated FSAR was done on a working copy of the FSAR but was not intended to be reflected in the official version.

Printed 3/13/9610 05:08 AM Pege 1 of 2

Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-1012 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Significance levels do not apply here as this not a discrepant condition.

Conclusion:

NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-1012, does not represent a discrepant condition. A review of the current annotated FSAR Table 9.5-9 shows that the reference for the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head is the Colt Operating Instruction Manual (OlM) 241-001 A, Dwg. No. 11910 288. A review of the current manual does indicate the crankcase vacuum pump capacity and discharge head specifications on drawing 11910 288. The DICP for UIR 1298 is correct as written. The copy of the March 1997 FSAR shows the current version of the FSAR as indicated and confirms the values are unchanged as a result of the annotation effort. The annotated FSAR was done on a working copy of the FSAR but was not intended to be reflected in the official version.

Significance levels do not apply here as this not a discrepant condition.

Previouoty identmed by NU7 O Yes @ No NonE'-s ,: Condet6on?U Yes @ No Resolution Pending?O ve. @ No n - % unseeoived? O ve. @ No Review

• -, Not Acceptable Needed Date gg,gg % g VT Lead: Nwl, Anthony A B VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date: 3/12/98 sL Comments: NU disposition is not acceptable.

Please note that the referenced OlM drawing no.11910 288 is for Oil Separator (shown on the P&lD EM-118E as 3EGD-SP1 A/B), and not for the Crankcase Vacuum Pump (3EGD-P1 A/B). The specifications shown on this drawing are for the Oil Separator. Per OlM the drawin0 for the crankcase vacuum pump is the drawing no.11907 497. This drawing does not show crankcase vacuum pump capacity or discharge head. Also, the drawing may not be current, since there is a handwritten note

" Delete!" written on it.

Pnnled M351610:05:12 AM Page 2 of 2