ML20216G325
| ML20216G325 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1997 |
| From: | Schopfer D SARGENT & LUNDY, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 9583-100, NUDOCS 9709150080 | |
| Download: ML20216G325 (31) | |
Text
[D ,= ,
- Sorgerfts c> L u rstly ' ' ' -
, F Don K. Schopler '
ET$Nr* s$
September 11,1997 Project No.- 9583100 Docket No. 50-423 Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 .
Independent Corrective Action Verification Program United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
. Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 I have enclosed the following nineteen (19) discrepancy reports (DRs) identified during-our review activities for the ICAVP. These DRs are bemg distributed in accordance with the Communications Protocol, PI MP3 01.
DR No, DR-MP3 0085 DR No. DR-MP3 0123 DR No. DR-MP3-0098 DR No. DR-MP3-0124 DR No. DR-MP3-Ol% DR No. DR-MP3 0125 DR No. DR-MP3-0107 DR No. DR-MP3 0128 DR No. DR MP3-0108 DR No. DR-MP3-0140 /
DR No. DR MP3-0116. DR No. DR-MP3-0142 I DR No. DR-MP3 0118 DR No. DR MP3 0145 /
DR No. DR MP3-0119 - DR No. DR-MP3 0153
. DR No. DR-MP3-0120 DR No, DR MP3-0156
~
- DR No. DR-MP3 0121 -
9709150000 970911 PDR ADOCK 05000423 h
P PDR 3ggg lilHIE15JIBlllOlillll!
$5 East Montce Street
- Chicago. It 60603-5780 USA
- 312-269 2000 l
s s
- 4 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission September i1,1997 Document Control Desk Project No. 9583-100 Page 2 I have also enclosed the following two (2) DRs that have been determined to be invalid.
No action is required from Northeast Utilities for these two DRs, The basis for their invalid determination is include' on the document.
DR No. DR-MP3-0033 DR No. DR MP3-0110 Please direct any questions to me at (312) 269-6078.
Yours very truly, g
D. K. Schopfer Vice President and ICAVP Manager DKS:spr Enclosures Copics:
E. Imbro (1/l) Deputy Director, ICAVP Oversight T, Concannon (1/l) Nuclear Energy Advisory Council J. Fougere (1/l) NU m Wavpun\974wo91Ia du:
T.
l s DR No. DR-MP3-0085 Northeast Utilities ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
. Review Group: Operatens & Maentenance and Testing DR VALID Review Element: Test Procedure - PotentialOperabMy issue Discipl6ne: Operaten. O yes -
Diecrepancy Type: 0 & M & T Procedure
@ No Syste WProcess: QSs NRC significance level:4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpancy: Documentation of " TSP Storage Basket Volume Check" cannot be verified. l l
Descripuon: Procedure SP 3606.10, Rev. O, " Trisodium Phosphate Storage Basket Volume Check" (Refueling Interval Surveillance) , refers to OPS Form 3606.10-1," TSP Storage Basket Volume Check", l in the following sections
- j I) Table of Contents '
- 11) Prerequiste Section 2.1.1 lii) Instructions Sections 4.1,4.1.3 and 4.5, and iv) Review and Signoff Section 5.1.
This requirement on the TSP will ensure that the water in the !
i recircuation sump has a final pH of equal to or greater than 7.0, while not exceeding a spray pH of 10.5.
1 I
A review of the Millstone Unit 3 Procedure Index and the computerized databases indicated that this form does not exist, i Periodic verification of TSP volume is not documented.
Review Valid inval6d Needed Date initiator: Ungeran, R. O O O $/SS7 VT Lead: Bass Ken 8 0 0 S'S/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K G O O S/8'S7 O O SS$7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K G Date:
INVALIO:
l Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previoumly identified by NU7 (,) Yes (4) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date M R.
VT Lead: Bass, Ken VT Mgt: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: smgh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
Printed 9/11/9710 o1:24 AM Page 1 of 1 1
t <
L ,
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0098 i
Northeast Uk lities Milistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- Review Oroup: System DR VAll0 PotentialOperebelsty leeue Diecipiene: Pild ng Des"'"
D6screpency Type: Calculeton Om
( ,)
SystemProcese: RSS NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed 1o NU:
Dets PubMehed:
66 crepancy: ~ Qualification of End loads for Expansion Joints is required.
D*ecrismon: In the process of reviewing Calculation 12179-NP(F) X7923 Rev.
1, includin0 Calculation Change Notice (CCN) No,'s 1 through 5 we noted the following discrepancy:
The calculation 12179-NP(F) X7923 Rev, i has an unverified assumption that Expansion Joints 3RSS*EJ1 A to D and EJ2A to D are qualified for the end loads computed in the revised calculation.
Review Valid invelki Needed Dele O O 8S7 inittetor: Sin 0h, R. O VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A @ Q Q 9/8S7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K g ] Q 9/E97
$*S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K G O O Dete:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes ('97 No Review
- ^***
- initiator: Sin 0h,R.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: S6n0h, Anand K Dele:
SL Conwnente:
Pnnted 9/11/971o 02 09 AM p g.1 of I
g ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0106 Northeast Utilities Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR VAUD Revkw EM systern Du@n Potential Operebility issue Discipl6ne: Electrical Duen O va Discrepency Type: Drew 6ng gg SysterWProcess: Oss NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Logic and Schematic Drawing Discrepancy for QSS MOVs Ducription: Note 6.6 on the general notes logic drawing LSK-0-3B indicates that for valves that perform a safety function, the torque switches are bypassed 95% of valve travel. The schematic drawings for the QSS MOVs (3QSS*MOV34A & B) indicate that the torque switches are bypassed with lirnit switch contacts. The limit switch contacts, in effect, bypass the torque switch at 100% of valve travel. Reference schematic drawings ESK-6LS and ESK-6LT.
A similar condition was identified in the Service Water System via Unresolved item Report (UIR) No. 2099. The recommended resolution of UIR 2099 is to revise note 6.6 in the general notes drawing LSK 0-38.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date S'8S7 initiator: Morton. R. O O O VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A B O O S'8'97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O SS7 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O S"7 Date:
INVAllD:
cate:
RESOLUTION:
j Previously idenufled by NU? () Yes tGl No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date R.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chrnn: singh, Anand K i
Dete:
SL Comments:
i I
I Pnnted 9/11fJ710:03:20 AM Page 1 of 1
s ICAVP DR N2. DR MP3-0107 Northeast Utilities Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VAUD Review Element: System Design p , ,
D6ecipl6ne: Electrical Design Discrepancy Type: Drawing O va (5) No System / Process: RSS NRC significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Logic Diagram Discrepancy for Valves 3RSS*MOV38A & B.
Description:
General Notes drawing LSK-0-38, note 6.1 Indicates that "When torque seating is required, the logic diagram will so state.'
Schematic diagrams ESK-6AFL and ESK-6AFM indicate that 3RSS*MOV38A & B will close on torque, since the torque switch is not bypassed during the final 15% of valve travelin the closing direction. The associated logic diagram, LSK-27-11H, does not indicate valve closure on torque.
Review Valid Invalid Needed Date initiator: Morton, R. O O S'8S7 g/8/97 VT Leed: Neft, Anthony A Q Q Q VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O S'S'87 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anend K O O O S'5'S7 Date:
INVALIO:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifwd by NU7 (,) Yes (9) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date R.
VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A
_ e.
SL Comments:
i l
Pmted 9/11S710 04 oO AM Page 1 of 1
l ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0108 Northeast Utilities Milletone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
+
Review oroup: Systern DR VALIO Review Element: Systern Design Potentid OperetnHty leeue Diecipline: Piping Design Q y,,
D6ecrepency Type: Ceiculation (S) No systemProcess: RSS NRC significence level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date PutdistM:
Discrepency: Max Operating Temperature Exceeds Allowable for Unsleeved Containment Penetrations 93 to 95
Description:
In the process of reviewing the following pipe stress calculations for the Recirculation Spray System, (1) Calculation No.12179-SDP RSS-01361M3 Rev. 4, dated 5/29/97 (ii) Piping and Instrumentation Diagram, Low Pressure Safety injection / Containment Recirculation, Drawing No.12179-EM-112C Rev,16 (111) Piping and Instrumentation Diagram, Low Pressure Safety injection, Drawing No.12179-EM 112A, Rev. 25 (iv) Calculation No.12179-NP(0) X8200 Rev. 2, dated 8/9/84 with Calculation Change Noticos (CCN's) 1 through 9. CCN 9 dated 12/4/96 (v) Calculation No.12179-NP(B)-X7102 Rev 4, dated 6/8/90 with Calculation Change Notices (CCN's) 1 and 2. CCN 2 dated 3/25/97 (vi) FSAR Section 3.8.1.1.4, Steel Liner and Penetrations (vil) Design Criteria for Containment Liner Penetrations, NETM-54, issued May 1984 (viii) Calculation No.12179-NS(B) 120 Rev. 2, CCN #9, ' Class 2 Unsleeved Penetrations' we noted the following discrepancy:
Background:
According to the stress data package (l), operating condition 9, an Emergency & Faulted condition, is described as follows 'For a small break LOCA, the Containment Recirculation System may not be automatically actuated. Containment spray is not required and is not actuated resulting in a sump temperature of 215 deg F at time of recirculation. The operator manually actuates either 3RSS*P1A or PIB which has a discharge temperature of 227 deg F due to pump heat addition. With a loss of service water to associated cooler (3RSS*E1 A or E18), the cooler discharges water of 227 deg F to the reactor coolant system cold legs via the CHS and SHS pumps'.
The P&lD's (ii) and (iii) show that the flow path to the reactor coolant system cold legs inside containment is through lines 3-Sil-010 8-2 (through penetration 93), 3SIL-008-130-2 (through penetration 95), and 3SIL 010-8-2 (through penetration 94).
These lines are analyzed in pipe stress analysis calculations (iv) and (v). The operating process temperature for these Printed 9/11/9710 06 03 AM Page 1 of 2
t 4
DR No. DR-MP3-0108 Northeast Utilities ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report penetrations under the above emergency & faulted condition is 227 deg F. Penetrations 93 to 95 are unsleeved.
Based on the applicable section of the FSAR (vi), unsleeved penetrations consist of piping installed through the containment wall that is thermally cold, and the process pipe is welded directly to the reinforcement plate, Based on the design criteria for containment liner penetrations (vil), unsleeved penetrations are used for thermally cold systems, where the operating temperature inside the process '
pipe is 200 deg F or less. Sleeved penetrations are ussd for all thermally hot systems, where the operating temperature inside the penetration is more than 200 deg F.
Discrepancy:
The operating process temperature inside Unsleeved penetrations 93,94 and 95 under one of the emergency and faulted conditions is 227 deg F. This exceeds the design criteria allowable temperature of 200 deg F for unsleeved penetrations.
Larger thermal expansion induced loads due to the higher pipe-penetration assembly temperature have not been addressed in the penetration qualification calculation (viii).
Review Val 6d inval6d Needed Date initletor: Prakash,^- 0 0 0 SS7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A B O O SS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K B O O S/8'S7 SSS7 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O l Date:
INVALIO:
Dete:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by Nu? O Yes (#) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date gg pg VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O INC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Cortunents:
l l
l Pnnted 9/11/9710:05:16 AM Page 2 of 2
i DR No. DR MN-0116
! Northeast Utilities ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Accident Mfhgaton DR VALID Review Element: Test Procedure g gy ,,
D6ecipline: Mechanical Design
- O vee Discrepency Type: Design Control Procedure (9) No
'~
SysterM'rocess: N/A NRc Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6*croPency: Discrepancy in Documenting Regulatory Requirements for Fuel Building Filter Testing Descript6on: Surveillance Procedure SP3614C.2 lists steps for in-place vendor testing and inspection for HEPA and charcoal filter bypass lealtage and penetration testing. The steps in Sections 4.3 and 4.4 refer to the use of ' vendor procedures" and
' standard industry practice,' but do not state compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.52 or ANSI N5101980 as was done in a similar procedure, SP3614F.2. The Technical Specifications Manual Section 4.9.12 does, however, indicate that the test will comply with these standards.
Forms for documenting test results are OPS Forms 3614C.2 7 and 3614C.2-9 (Train A) and OPS Forms 3614C.2 8 and 36140.210 (Train B ).
Compilance with Regulatory Guide 1.52 and ANSI N510-1980 as indicated in the Technical Specifications Manual could not be determined from the Surveillance Procedure or OPS Forms.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Kane,T.J, O Q Q M97 VT Lead: Rahele. Raj D 0 0 0 2ss7 O S8'S7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O IRc Clwnn: singh, Anand K O O O "S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Prev 6ously identified by NU7 O Yes (#1 No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date g 7y VT Leed: Rahe}a. Raj D b b VT Mgt; schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
PHnted 9/11/97 io 06 47 AM pag.1 og 3
e ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0118 Northeast Utilities Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Oroup: System DR VALID ReMW: s#em W Potential Operaldlety issue D6scip66ne: Electrical Design O va D6screpency Type: Drawing
@ No SystemProcess: RSS NRc Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecropency: Schematic and Logic Drawing Discrepancy for RSS Pump Motor Circuit Ducription: Logic Diagrams LSK-2711 A, LSK 27118, LSK 2711J, and LSK 2711K Indicate that there is a " Loss of Power" interlock in the start circuit of the recirculation pump motors (3RSS*P1 A, P10, Pic & P1D). The schematic drawings (ESK SCN, SCP, SCQ, and SCR) do not indicate a ' loss of power' interlock in the starting circuit, but do show the loss of power interiock in the
" trip" circuit. These logic diagrams are not consistent in representing the loss of power interlock in the start circuit with other similar motor start circuits, such as 3QSS*P3A and 3QSS*P3B (reference logic diagrams LSK 2712A and LSK 27-12E).
The representation of the loss of power Interlock in the RSS logic diagrams implies that there is a ' loss of power" contact in the start circuit of the motors. The representation of the loss of power interlock in the QSS logic diagrams does not imply a " loss of power' contact in the start circuit of the motor, Both the QSS and RSS schematic drawings, for the pump motors, Indicate a
- loss of power
- contact in the trip circuit only.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date inNetor: Morton, R. O O O S'8'S7 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A g Q [ SM7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K G O O SS'S7 SS'S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O
- D.ie
INVALID:
Date:
RESCtUTION:
l Prev 60uely identiflod by NU7 D Yes l*) No Rev6ew A C8Ptable Not Acceptable Needed Date R,
VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A O O O VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K b IRc Chmn: Singh, Anand K
_e l SL Comments:
Printed W11/97 to 07,39 AM Page 1 of 1 l
l
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0119 Northeast Utilities Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: Systern DR VAUD Potential Operability issue D6scipline: EW Design O Yes 06ecrepancy Type: Drawing gg Systonerocess: R$s NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpancy: Logic and Schematic Drawing Disrepancy for RSS MOVs Deecription: Note 6.6 on the general notes logic drawing LSK-0-3B indicates that for valves that perform a safety function, the torque switches are bypassed 95% of valve travel. The schematic drawings for the RSS MOVs indicate that the torque switches are bypassed with limit switch contacts. These limit switches bypass the torque switches at different ranges of valve travel as indicated below:
The limit switch contacts which are in parallel with the torque switches will bypass the torque switches at approximately:
100% of valve travel for MOVs 20A, B, C, &D, and 23A, B, C,
& D.
- 85% of valve travel for MOVs 38A & B.
80% of valve travel for MOVs 8837A & B and 8838A & B, Note, a similar condition was identified in the Service Water System via Unresolved item Report (UIR) No. 2099. The recommended resolution of UIR 2099 is to revise note 6.6 in the general notes drawing LSK 0-3B.
Review Vahd invalid Needed Date 9/s,S7 initiator: Morton, R. O O O O S3S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony ^ O O O SSS7 VT Mgt: schopfer. Don K O O O SSS7 IRc Chmn: Singh. Anand K 8 O Date:
(
l INVALID:
I l Date:
RESOLUTION:
I Previously identifled by NU7 ( ) Yes (% No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date i in R.
i VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K l
Date:
SL Comments:
I Printed 9/11/9710 06.23 AM Page 1 of 1 l
ICAVP DR N3. DR-MP3 0120 Northeast Utilities Ministone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALID EM: Spem W Potentir.' OperetWity leeue D6ecipline: Electrical Design O Ya D6screpency Type: Drawing 4~ g SystemProcess: SWP NRC SignHbconce level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepency: Schematic Diagram ESK 6ALG and Logic Diagram LSK 910E Discrepancy Descripuon: 1) Schematic Diagram ESK-6ALG, for motors 3SWP*P3A and 3SWP*P38, shows contact 7 8, from device 3-3SWP*P3A, in parallelwith contact 7 from handswitch 13SWP*P3A. The logic diagram LSK 9-10E does not account for contact 7 8 (from device 3-3SWP*P3A) in parallel with the handswitch contact.
Similar for motor circuit 3SWP*P38.
- 2) Motor circuit 3SWP*P3A uses contact 12 from device 3-3SWP*P3A. This contact is not identified with a device designation.
- 3) The revision block of Logic diagram LSK 9-10E (Rev.17) incorrectly identifies revision 17 as revision 15.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Morton. R. O O O "S7 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A g Q ] MS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K O O O SSS7 IRC Chmn: S6ngh, Anand K Q O O SSS7 Date:
INVALIO:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously idenuf6ed by NU7 C.) Yes @ No Rev6ew p
Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O O IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
PrWed E'11/9710.o9:20 AM Pege 1 of 1
DR No, DR MP3 0121 Northeast Util6 ties ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Oroup: SyWom D8t VALID I
Pose eWietOperabittyleeue D6ecrepancy Type: Drewing 06ecnpline: Clodrical Design Om (9) No srelem/Procese: SV'P NRC signiecence level: 4 Dele FAKod to NO:
Date Pued6ehed:
b6.crepeacy Logic and Schematic Drawing Discrepancy for SWP MOVs D**crtPt6en: Note 6.6 on the general notes logic drawing LSK-0 3B indicates that for Valves that perform a safety function, the torque switches are bypassed 95% of valve travel. The schematic diagrams for the SWP MOVs (3SWP*MOV24A, B, C, & D,50A & B,71 A & B, and 102A, B, C, & D) indicate that the torque switches are bypassed with limit switch contacts. The limit switch contacts, in effect, bypass the torque switches at 100% of valve travel.
Reference schematic diagrams ESK-6DD,605,6DF,6DG, 6AAK,6AAL,6AAM,6AAN,6AAU,6AAV,6AAW, and 6AAX.
Note, a similar condition was identified in the Service Water System via Unresolved item Report (UIR) No. 2099, for other MOVs. The recommended resolution of UIR 2099 is to revise note 6.6 in the general notes drawing LSK 0-38.
Reyw Valid invalid Needed Date O ES97 initletor: Morton, R. O O Q &%97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q Q O O SSS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O SSS7 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O Dele:
INVAllo:
Deter RESOLUTION:
Previously Identined by NU7 (.) Yes (Si No Review Acc*Ptable Not Acceptable Needed Date M R.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O VT Mer: Schi4,for Don K O O O IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Commente:
Printed &'11/971010.02 AM - t ege 1 or i
ICAVP DR No. DR MP34123 mast witties Miiistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Systern DR VALID Review Element: System Desig" potentlel OperebHNy luue 06eciphne: Cle*kal Dwiga O Yo.
06ecrepency Type: Dred'9 (9) No SysterrvProcese: &WP NRC signifkance level: 4 Dele Faxed to NU:
Date Puheished:
D6ecropency: Schematic Diagram ESR2iRR and Logic Diagram LSK 2212B Discrepancy Dacrip#on: Schematic diagram ESK 6RR (for motor circuits 3SWP*P2A and 3SWP*P2B) and logic diagram LSK 2212B do not match, as indicated below.
- 1) The logic diagram indicates an 'AND' condition between the control switch 13SWP*P2A and the transfer switch 43A.
3HVK*P1 A in the 'Stop" portion of the logic. The schematic shows these two contacts in series. Elther contact opening will de energlie the contactor and stop the pump motor, which should be reflected as an 'OR' condition in the logic diagram (i.e.,43A 3HVK*P1 A in ' Remote
- OR 13SWP*P2A in 'Stop").
Similar for motor circuit 3SWP*P28,
- 2) Schematic diagram ESK-6RR indicates the use of a relay (device 74) for annunciation on the loss of control power or thermal overload. Logic diagram LSK 22128 does not indicate the use of a relay for annunciation,
'tevivw Vaud inva:6d Needed Date aarg7 inM6stor: Morton, R. O O O S$S7 VT Leed: Nwl, Anthony A O O O VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K D D D SSS7 O O $SS7 1RC Chmn: S6ngh. Anand K D Date:
INVALID:
l Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously Montmed by NU? Q Yu (9) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date m R.
VT Lead: Nwl, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K .
Dele:
SL Commerds:
Printed 9/11/9710,10 44 AM Pope 1 of 1 I
l-
_ ~.. __ , _ .
.. . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ ~.._____ .__. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ . .
ICAVP DR No. DR MP34124 Northeast Utiinles Millstone UnN 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: Syelem DRVAUD Review Element: System Design g D6ecipl6ne: Electrical Deelen D6xtepancy Type: DreMng Ow 7,,
Syster Wrocess: $WP NRC Segreconce level: 4 Me FMed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ecrepency: Logic and Schematic Drawing Discrepancy in Auxillary Relay Designation D*wrlpuan: Schematic diagrams ESK 6AAA,6AAB,6AAC, & 6AAD identifies the thermal overload auxiliary relay as a '49X" device.
The logic diagram LSh.2711E identifies the thermal overioad auxillar/ relay at a '74' device.
Review Ve86d invol6d Nooded Date inMietor: Morton, R. O O O **S7 -
VT Lead: Neft Anthony ^ O O O **S7 Q SS97 VT Mer Schopfer Don K Q Q 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O SSS7 Deio:
INVAUD:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
^
Prev 6ously identined by NUP () Yes (#) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date MMW W R.
VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A O O O VT Mgt: Schopter Don K O O O 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anend K Date:
SL Comnents:
Printed S'11/9710:11:27 AM p.g. t or 9
. 1 ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0126 ;
Northeast Utilities Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report
. Review oroup: System DR VAll0 Potential Operabawy leeue D6ecipione: CloctncelDes*
D6ectopency Type: Drowing Om 4g SystemProceos: SWP NRC Sigrdnconce levd 4 Date faxed to NU: l Date Published:
D6ecr*Pency: Schematic and Logic Diagrams Discrepancy for 3SWP'MOV102A D Doncript6an: General Notes drawing LSK 0 3B, note 6.3 states 'Unless otherwise stated on the logic diagrams, valve travel is stopped in an intermediate position by motor overload or high torque.' The schematic diagrams (ESK 6AAU & 6AAW) for 3SWP*MOV102A
& C meets the intent of this note, with the exception of the close direction and when the selector switch is in the *lsolate' position.
When the switch is in the isolate position and the valves are to be closed, the thermal overload protection is not available. '
Logic diagram LSK-910K does not indicate any exceptions to note 6.3 (LSK 0 38).
Logic diagrams LSK 9100 and LSK 910K (for J
3SWP*MOV102A, B, C, & D) indicate that both an interiock from the 'Open/ Auto
- handswitch and an interlock from the associated Service Water Pump are required in order for the valves to close, The schematic diagrams (ESK 6AAU,6AAV, 6AAW,6AAX) Indicates that the closing circuit requires an interlock form the Service Water Pump, only, and do not indicate '
l an interlock from the handswitch.
Review I alid invalid Needed Date initletor: Morton, R. O O O S'5S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O S'6S7 VT Mgt: schopfer Don K O O O SSS7 1RC Chmn: 86ngh, Anand K Q Q Q 9997 Data:
INVAllD:
. _ _ m.
Date:
All.0LUTION:
Previously iderdlood by NUF O Yee (#1 No Revkw Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date M R.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mgt: Schopfer Don K O g O IRC Chmn: Stngh, Anand K =
Delet SL Comments:
Printed n'11/9710.12:13 AM Page 1 of 1
ICAVP DR No. DR MP34128 Northeast Utilities Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
. neview aroop: erovemmm.c Da vAuD Review Element: ConectNe Acton Procese g mcipune: Meowtal Desg" O Yee D6ecrepency Type: Correcthe Ad6an g systemfroceee: DGX )
NHC signencance level: 4 Dee rAxed to NU:
Date Putdished:
I D6ecrepency: Incomplete Corrective Action Package De cription: 1. ACR M3-96-0361 evaluated pitting found in the vicinity of a Monet/ Copper Nickeljoint. The evaluation of the condition was performed by the Materials Testing Laboratory. The laboratory issued appropriate recommendations, but it is not clear from the ;
ACR pacirage whether these recommendations are being '
implemented, whether each of the similar types of joints has been electrolytically isolated, or whether coating on other joints has been oris being monitored.
- 2. There is no evidence in the package that a safety evaluation screening or safety evaluation was performed to add the epoxy coating as required by paragraph 6.1.2 of NGP 3.12, revision 9, and NGP 8.06, revision 1.
- 3. There are a number of handwritten questions (some unanswered) and comments in the ACR package (see pages titled " Corrective Action Review of Completed Assignments Prior to RP4 rev. 4 efed. date"). Condition Report packages are required to be Quality Assurance (QA) Records by pparagraph 1,17.1 of RP 4, revision 4, and by Technical Specifications 6.10.2.b and 6.10.3.1. Paragraph 3.2.1 of ANSI N45.2.9-1974 states that QA records are to be legible and completely filled out. ANSI N45.2.91974 is endorsed by Regulatory Guide 1.88 dated November,1976 which is a commitment of the Northeast Utilities' Quality Assurance Program Topical Report.
Review Veled invol6d Needed Date initiator: Shopperd. R. P. O O O &?a97 VT Leed: Ryan. Thomme J O O O S?>S7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O SSS7 IRC Chmn: $1ngh, Anand K O O O **S7 Dm.:
INVALID:
Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identtfled by NU? O Yee @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date Wimor' Sheppard. R. P.
VT Lead: Ryan, Thomme J VT Mgri Schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K D.e ,
Pnnled Sv11/9r 10.13 57 AM Pope 1 of 2
ICAVP DR No. DR MP34128
( Northeast Utilhies Millstone Unn 3 Discrepancy Report sL Comments:
PrWed W114710:14 06 AM Page 2 of 2
l ICAVP DR No. DR.MP34140 Northeast Utilities Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
. Reykw oroup: System DR VALID Review Element: System Doongo y g, D6ecipline: Mechancel Dwign D6ecrepency Type: Dreeng O va '
(9) No SystemProcese: HVX NRC 88eamc*ac* level; 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
INocrepency: Emergency Diesel Generator Enclosure Tomado Dampers Dactlpt6an: P&lD EM.150015 shows an incorrect orientation for tomado dampers 3HVP'DMPT2A/B/C/D,3HVP'DMPTSA/B/C/0, and 3HVP*DMPT6A/B/C/D. Damper blades are shown opening in the direction of normal altflow. Damper blades on these exhaust paths should be shown to open against normal airflow in order to fuction properly during a tomado.
Rev6ew vand invalid Needed Date O ataS7 initletor: Stout. M. D. O O VT Leed: Nort, Anttony A g Q Q ST97 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O S1V97 O SSS7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O Date:
< INVALIO:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
~
Previously identmed by NUP C) Yes f95 No Review Ireitletor: Stout, M. D.
i VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 1RC Chmn: 56ngh, Anand K
- e.
EL Comments:
Pnnled B'11/97 to 14 46 AM Page 1 of 1
DR No. DR MP3 0142 Northeast Utlinies ICAVP Mitistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
. Review Oroup: Accxterd Magatwi DR VALID Review Element: System Desig" PMonuel OperabHity issue Discigdine: Otter Q y,,
D6screpency Type: Calcutaten (e) No Systern?rocess: N/A NRC Sigrdfncance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putdished:
D4*croPancy: Unsupported Design Assumption Descriptkm: A review of the following documentation has concluded that a discrepancy exists with regard to documentation relating to estimated doses at the Millstone 3 (MP3) exclusion area boundary (EAD) innd the low population zone (LPZ). The documents reviewod are:
- 2) Calculation 88-019-96RA, Rev.2, 'LOCA from MP3 to EAB/LPZ'
- 3) USNRC Standard Review Plan Section 6.5.2 Calculation 88 019-96RA was performed to estimate the offsite doses at the EAD and LPZ following a design basis Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) at MP3. The calculation was performed to incorporate revised inillal conditions for the MP3 containment system. In order to continue to meet the design basis for offsite doses, credit was given to the radiological removal capabilities of the cnntainment spray systems.
In the above calculation, an exchange rate of two (2) tumovers per hour between the sprayed and unsprayed regions was assumed per Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 0.5.2. SRP 6.5.2 states 2 tumovers per hour may be assumed providod adequate flow exists between the regions. The calculation does not address the flow capability between these two regions. Thus, the assumption is not substantiated.
Review Vakd inval6d Needed Date O S5S7 initiator: Dennett. L. A. O O
&%97 VT Lead: Rahe}a. Raj D Q [ Q O SSS7 VI Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O IRC Chmn: $4ngh. Anand K D D D SSS7 Dai.:
INVAllO:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identitled by NU? O Yes iti No Review initlat.w: Bennett L. A.
VT Lead: Rabeja. Rai D b
Printed S'11/97 to 15 4t AM Page 1 of 2
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0142 Northeast Utilities
' Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report ,
..._,m,. _
VT Mgri Schos& Don K . O O RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K
- b b O O O o.i.:
SL Conenents:
1 Printed W11W 10.15 51 AM - p g
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0145 l Northeast Utiinies Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
. Rev6ew aroup: system onvAuo Review Element: system Des @
Potential Operabelsty 16 sue Disciphne: Piping Design Q y ,,
Discrepency Type: Calcunstion (e) No SystemfProcess: CWP NRC Significence level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 9/14/97 Discrepancy: Basis for eliminating vapor gap closure force time histories not documented
Description:
In the process of rcviewing the following documents, (1) Pipe Stress Analysis Calculation 12179 NP(B) 346 XF, Rev, 0, CCN 1 (ii) Pipe Stress Analysis Calculation 12179-NP(B) 360 XF, Rev.
O,CCN3 (ill) Flow Transient Calculation 1217g-NP(B) 271 FA, Rev. 4, 11/26/84 we noted the following discrepancy:
Background:
Interoffice Memorandum titled, ' Design forcing functions on service water system due to vapor gap closure' is incorporated in (i) and (II). The memo states: Based on SWP hydraulic transient tests, and meeting discussions on 'SWP Hydraulic Transient Test Results' held on 12/1/84 at the Millstone 3 site, (1) Loads associated with Gap 2 may be eliminated. Gap 7 may also be eliminated provided the system start up tests will assure by visual and audible observations that no vapor gap formation occurs by CCP heat exchangers.
(2) The forcing functions due to Gap 6 closure must be considered in design but should be reduced by a factor of 2 for both upset and faulted conditions.
The above modifications will be documented in a revision to the calculation (111).
Discrepancy:
The load reductions proposed have been incorporated in the stress calculations. The fluid transient calculation (iii) has not been revised. The proposed modifications to the SWP water Printed 9'11197 3 51:13 PM Page 1 of 2 4
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0146 Northeast Utiitties Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report !
- hammer analysis have not been documented.
No basis, othe* than the interoffice memorandum is provided for I eliminating the forcing functionst.
Calculation title of (I) CCN 3 has the following typographical error:
Time History Analysis Problem 1908. Service Water Piping' should read !
Time History Analysis. Problem 1907 Service Water Piping'. i Review Val 6d inval60 Needed Dale Init6slott Prokesh, A. Q Q Q 8/2&S7 VT Lead: N~1, Anthony A y [ ] &"497 O 8'5S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O SSS7 IRC Chmn: Srgh, Anand K O O O w .:
INVAUO:
Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identelled by NU7 O Yes (#1 No Review Acceptable Not Acceptab6e Needed Date p
VT Lead: Nori, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopter, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K
- e:
SL Conenents:
.i PrWed 9/11/97 3 5120 PM Page 2of 2
t Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 4153 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- Review oroop: svoi.,n DR vAuo
""* * * '"""': S r"" "
- Poi.nuei op.r.6amy i..o.
D6ecipe6m: Piping Design Diecrepancy Type: Calculatoi Om (9) No system / Process: SWP NRC signiacance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Pubtlehed:
Descrepency: Valve location discrepancy between PalD and stress analysis isometric DescrtPt6ea: In the process of reviewing the following documents for the Service Water system, (i) Calculation No.12179-NP(B).X53900 Rev. 5 dated 4/20/93 (h) Calculation No.12179 NP(B) X53901 Rev. 6, dated 4/20/93 with CCN's 1 to 3, CCN 3 dated 6/21/96 4
(ill) Drawing No.12179-EM 133D, Rev. 23, Piping &
Instrumentation Dlagram . Service Water we noted the following discrepancy:
In the stress analysis worksketch (I), valve 3SWP*V47 (3SWP'TV35B power valve), is located on line 3 SWP 006-49 downstream of the branch point for line 3-SWP-006-397. But on the P&lD (iii), power valve 3SWP*V47 is shown upstream of the branch point.
The same situation occurs in the stress analysis worksketch (ii).
Here valve 3SWP*V14 (3SWP'TV35A power valve), is locatedon line 3-SWP 006 34 downstream of the branch point for line 3-SWP 006-398. But on the PalD (iii), power valve 3SWP'V14 is shown upstream of the branch point.
Review Valid inval6d Needed Date initiator: Prakash, A.
O O O SS7 VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A g ] [ S'497 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O SSS7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O SSS7 Deie:
INVAllo:
Dele:
REs0LUTION:
Previously identined by NU? O Yes @ No Review init6ator: Prakash, A.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mor: schopfer. Don K LRC Chmn: $4rgh, Anand K
_e
! AL C&"a' Printed 9/11/9710.16 s3 AM Page 1 of 2 m i-- + -
pwy., ,--.v ww .--.-.--i.,
3 .
ICAVP DR No. DR.MP34153 Northeast Utilities utiletone und 3 Discrepancy Report 4
u I
i l
l i
i i
l t
l Printed W11/9710.17.02 AM Page 2 of 2
-. # y _- - _ . - - - -, - - - -r,,,w---, -- , , - . - . , . . y e -
r.< --...-.w-..r..-,, - , - , - -.
DR No. DR-MP3 0156 Northeast Utilities ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- Rev6ew Group: Progrommate DR VAllD Review Elseront: Corrective Action Procese ,, g D6scipl6ne: Otho' O Yes Discrepancy Type: Correcttvo Athon
- No SystenVProcess: DGX NRc Signifncance level: 3 Date F AKed to NO:
Date Published:
Di$cropency: Insufficient Significance Level for ACR M3 06-0181 Descript6on: The ACR describes that many bolts on the hinged side of the back doors to the 4100V Switchgear were found to be missing during the 50.54f walkdown.. The Significance Level for the ACR is Level *D' per Form RP4 4, Rev. 2. The condition associated with ACR M3 96-0181 is reportable Reference LER.96-016. In addition . the condition is identified as an operability concern as no reasonable assurance was provided for operability; therefore, the 4100V Switchgear was determined to be Inoperable.
A Significance Level *D' is not considered appropriate considering the Reportability and Operability Condition and because the condition is not of " Low Consequence and Low Complexity".
Note: The same type of discrepancy is covered in DR MP3-0099.
Review Vahd Invalid Needed Date initiator: Cetuso,A. O O O S'5S7 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J O O O S"vS7 SSS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O O SS$7 IRc Chmn: $1ngh, Anand K O O O Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
' Prev 6ously identified by NU7 O Yes (*) No Review initiator: Caruso, A.
VT Lead: Ryan. Thornas J O O O VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRc Chmn: Sirgh. Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
I Printed 9'11.97 to 18 $1 AM Pege1 9 1~
- e. .
DR No. DM MP3 0033 Northeast Utilities ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group; system DR INVAllo ReYlew Elernent: system Desgn Potential Opereldhty issue D6sciphne: P6 ping Des 69n Dioctepancy Type: Calculeton Ow
,g SysterrvProcess: Rs3 NRC Shninconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putdiskt biocrepency: Waterhammer Analysis. System fill-up transient loads not considered Descrape6on: In the process of reviewing the "Waterhammer Analysis of Recirculation Spray System", Calculation No.12179-NP(B) 163 FA, Rev. 2, and the affected large bore pipe stress analysis calculations, we noted the following discrepancy:
Background:
Page 4 states that 'there are three significant hydraulic transients that affed the Recirculation Spray System.
(l) The llrst is encountered as the pump ' starts-up'. The fluid
' mass is accelerated from an at rest condition to a state of constant velocily.
(ii) The second occurs as the system fills with fluid. The system is initially empty and as each segment fills there is an unbalanced momentum force on the upstream elbow. This transient is not evaluated with the WATHAM computer code.
(lil) The last transient results from the system becoming water solid. The final alrmass is blod off, and the fluid flow is throttled at the spray nozzle, consequently there is a pressure surge in the system'.
Page 22 states that the pump starts up very quickly, in approximately 0.8 seconds. In this short duration a relatively short length (about 30 ft) of piping is filled with water, it is this short length of piping that will be affected by the pump start translent. Consequently the system should be analyzed for the effects of the system filling-up, not pump start up.
Page 23 provides a computation for the unbalanced momentum forces resulting from the system filling up.
Page 23 also states that 'Unlike the pump start up transient the system fill up forces will be felt at every elbow in the system during the fill-up process. They will have a stop forcing function.
The duration of the force will be from the time a segment starts being filled until the wavefront moves into the next segment.
These forces should be considered in the stress analysis of the system'.
Page 24A compares The results of Rev 0 & Rev i for both the pump start up and system going water solid'. And concludes,
'for system going water solid, Rev.1 loads are generally higher, and are even higher compared to pump start up loads.
Therefore, loads due to system going water solid should be used for the final design loads'. No comparison is made with the Printed S'11/97 9 59 46 AM Page 1 or 3
9
( . .
DR No. DR MP3-0033 )
Northeast Utilities ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report l
- momentum forces resulting from system filling up. These loads are in fact higher than the system going water solid loads for certain segments of the piping.
Page 24 A also states that 1he forcing functions generated by WATHAM due to system going water solid are stored on Tapes 011862 & 014045, THFILE=04 for input to NUPlPE computer program for time history analysis'.
Discrepancy:
The large bore pipe stress analysis calculations utilize WATHAM time histories from the above noted tape files. These time histories address case (ill), system going water solid The translent resulting from the system filling up was not evaluated by the WATI(AM computer code. As such, the force time history resulting from this transient is not included on the above noted tape files. Since the system fill-up event results in higher loads in some pipe segments, the system fill up transient should be accounted for in the affected pipe stress analyses.
Pump start up, system fill-up, and the system going water solid are all part of the same fluid translent created due to the activation of the recirculation spray system. The calculation does not address why it is acceptable to treat the three phases of the system activation as separate transients.
Revlew Vahd invahd Needed Date
- S 7 init6etw: Prakash, A.
O O O VT Leed: Neft, Anthony A O g Q &%97 VT Mgt; schopfer, Don K O O O IRC Chnm: Singh, Anand K O O O
! Date: g/g/97 INVALID: Although the system fill up transient results in higher loads in some pipe segments, the more critical translent for the entire system is judged to be the system going water solid The three hydraulic transients resulting from the activation of the l Recirculation Spray System have been addressed in the calculation. The most dominant forces result from the system
! going water solid. Therefore, based on engineering judgement it is acceptable to consider only these forces for pipe stress analysis. Stresses resulting from the other two phases will be lower than those resulting from the system going water solid transient.
Date:
REsOLUT, W:
Prev 60usly identified by NL ? O Yes @ No PrinteClID HT 959 56 AM Page 2 of 3 I
l
t .
lCAVP DR No. DR MP3 0033 Northeast Utlinien Milletone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- n.v w Acc + . m soiace.g. m sa u.
VT Lead: N.rt, Ardtmy A O O O VT My! Schop.r, Don K h RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O Date:
SL Commnnts:
i s
PrWed W11/9710 00 00 AM Page 3 of 3
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0110 Northeast Utinties Milletone unM 3 Discrepancy Report Review Oroup: System DR INVAUD Review Element: system Det.ign g ,
D6ecipune: Pyhig Desgn O ve.
D6ectopency Type: Calculaten (#1 No SyelorrvProcess: RSS NRc Sigenne.ence level: 4 Date faxed to NO:
Date Putdished: l D6.crepency: Unresolved piping overstress condition l Denrisdion: In the fr acess of reviewing the following pipe stress calculations for the Recirculation Spray and the Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, (i) Calculation No.12179 NP(B) X8200 Rev. 2, dated 8/9/84 with Calculation Change Notices (CCN's) 1 through 9. CCN 9 dated 12/4/96.
(ii) Calculation No.12179-SDP RSS-01361M3 ReV. 4, dated 5/29/97 we noted the following discrepancy:
Background:
CCN 9 has been written for the LPSI piping calculation (i) to address revised emergency & faulted operating conditions in the Recirculation Spray System stress data package (11). According to (ii), operating condition 9 is described as follows 'For a small break LOCA, the Containment Recirculation System may not be automatically actuated. Containment t> pray is not required and is not actuated resulting in a sump temperature of 215 deg F at time of recirculation. The operator manually actuates either 3RSS*P1 A or P1B which has a discharge temperature of 227 deg F due to pump heat addition. With a loss of service water to associated cooler (3RSS*E1 A or E18), the cooler discharges i
water of 227 deg F to the reactor coolant system cold legs via l the CHS and SHS pumps' CCN 9 Section 3. Assumptions, page 9 states that due to higher thermal loads, pipe local stress due to integral welded attachment for support anchor PSA127 exceed the code allowable stress. Therefore, resolution as well as the evaluation I of the objectives of the pipe stress analysis will be performed in a later CCN.
l Discrepancy; t
The subject Low Pressure Safety injection (LPSI) Piping in the ESF Buildin0, analyzed by calculation (i), shows an un-resolved overstress condition.
Review l Valid inval6d Needed Date O O 8/1oS7 j inittetor: Prakash. A- O VT Lead: Nort. Anthmy^ O O O *10S7 Printed 9/111971005 56 A#T M NP% D00 K Page 1 of 2
o 'i . .
DR No. DR MP3 0110 Northeast Utiliths ICAVP Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report l l
I v1 My sc:xpw, Don K O O O mc chmn: Srgh. Anand K O O '
O paio: g/jofg7 WNALID: ACCordlDQ lo Calculation Change Notice No.10, dated 12/4/96, the overstressed anchor PSA 127 has been deleted by DCN No.
DM3 001414 96, pese: f RESOLUTK)N:
Previously identehed by NUF C) Yes @) No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date inMW: Prs % A.
VT Lead Nerl, Antrony A O O O vi men schapter, con x 0 0 O mc chmn: sineh, Anand x Date:
] ] ]
SL comments:
4 Printed &'11/9710 06 09 AM P92W2
,e,-n, -gr- --.g -- -
y.-w 'ww.+ y w -,,---w-w-