ML20079N251

Forwards Record of 830214 Telcon Between Teledyne Engineering Svcs,Util & S&W Re Independent Design Review for Facility

ML20079N251
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	02/17/1983
From:	King J TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
5633-45, NUDOCS 8303030596
Download: ML20079N251 (5)

Text

,

, . 'RTELEDYNE 6b-39%

ENGNEERING SElWICES 130 SECOND AVENUE W ALTH AM. MASSACHUSETTS 02254 (617) 890-3350 TWX (710) 324-7580 February 17, 1983 5633-45 Mr. Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20114

Subject:

Independent Design Review for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station

Reference:

TES Letter fio. 5633-43 to the USNRC dated February 11, 1983

Dear Mr. Dentc1:

In accordance with the procedures defined in the referenced letter we are forwarding a record of the telephone conference call of February 14, 1983 between Teledyne Engineering Services, LILC0 and Stone and Webster personnel. The purpose of this call was for clarification of several of the LILC0 responses to TES Findings.

If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Donald F. Landers or the writer.

Very truly yours, TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES James P. ing Assista Project Manager JPK/lh Attachment cc: D. F. Landers (TES)

J. A. Flaherty (TES)

J. H. Malonson (TES)'

TES Document Control

$$k$$0 0 A

ENGINEERS AND METAll URGISTS

~

. . . 'A'Tri FrT(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES TELEPil0NE CALL RECORD (TES Project No. 5633)

Conference Call: February 14, 1983 Initiated Call: LILC0: Messrs. Montgomery, Seaman, Milligan S&W: Messrs. Foster, Foley, Eifert 4

Received Call: TES: Messrs. Landers, Flaherty, King Summary of Telecon LILCO: Don, as we discussed on Friday you indicated thac there were a number of remaining / outstanding concerns with your review of our first set of preliminary findings and I would now like to turn it over to you for identifying what those are and how we might be able to help you.

DFL: We have gone through 10 of the findings to date. Basically we are hung up in 99% of the cases because of documentation. What we need in most cases is detailed backup for some of the statements in your responses.

1. ICR f2 Vendor Supplied Baseplates DFL: We would like to have the 2 highest stress cases of baseplates for review. S&W did a generic review and we need to look at the 2 worst Cases. .

Response: That is essentially a confirmatory request.

DFL: Yes Response: Would these 2 cases be a review to confirm the existence of the program and the factuality of our previous statements or would this also be a detailed review.

DFL: Just the fact that you have looked at the 18, some of those are obvious, well within your guidelines. We would like the 2 highest stress cases outside the guidelines.

Response: OK

2. ICR #17 Calculations and Support Drawings DFL: This is a design process point. We can find a calc. that shows a drawing that we have as unacceptable and that later on the drawing is

"RTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Telephone Call Record Project 5633 February 14, 1983 going to be revised and everything in the field is going to catch up with that drawing. What we can't find anywhere (and that doesn't mean it doesn't exist) is that there is an interface here between the person that did the calc. that said that design is no good and we have to change it, that gets to look at the change and he is happy with it. Or that those 2 items are reconciled.

Response: We understand.

3. ICR #14 Bimetallic Joint in the LPCS System DFL: We need to see the procedures that define how long and how many E&

DCRs can be outstanding on a drawing.

Response: I think we can answer this question OK.

4. ICR #9 DFL: We have to be at your office to review the S&W standard in detail to determine its acceptability.

5. ICR #13 Small Supports on the Shield Wall DFL: Not a problem. We had this procedure attached to some cales. we

~ had and we find that it is an unofficial procedure.

6. ICR #5 DFL: What is Phase III rework?

Response: Defined by a QC Procedure.

DFL: We want to look at the QC Procedure.

Response: Wasn't that attached.

DFL: Where do I find something that tells me what Phase III is?

Response: Look at QC 15.4, page 1 of 8.

DFL: I can't find that.

~

"RTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Telephone Ccil Rerard Project 5633 February 14, 1983 Response: That wasn't included. Will get you a copy of QC 15.4.

DFL: We need any outstanding revisions to documents that cover the system we are reviewing. We should have been receiving those as they were being approved and transmitted.

Response: You weren't put on controlled distribution?

DFL: No but we should have been.

Response: 0K.

7. ICR f20

. DFL: What we need is all of the documentation that indicates that the design construction process found this error before we even got involved in the problem and here is all the documenation following it all the way through.

Response: OK

8. ICR #18 DFL: On this one we still have to look at our documentation. We are still working on it.

Response: OK

9. ICR No. 1 DFL: The same thing. Still working on it.

Response: We understand.

DFL: In order to expedite the transmittal of information and to allow l TES to review documents we are requesting a meeting at S&W on Tuesday,

2/15/83.

Response: OK. Ask for Bob Foley (Ext. 8020). Meeting in Conference Room 13A.

/lh l

r

v

' ' ' ^ o-,_

" % a'- ..

s N ,

W TELEDYNE 2

N ENGINEERING SERVICES  :

s u; se ro. 0 4a noe

[

utmau vassac~userrs ons4 -

i 1

Mr. Harold Denton, Director  !

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation '

U.~ S. Nuclear Regislatory Comission 7

7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 38444 gogg  ;

)

\ -

l i

s

~ _ _ _ _ _ _