ML15112A582
| ML15112A582 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 02/24/1998 |
| From: | Labarge D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Mccollum W DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| GL-87-02, GL-87-2, TAC-M69464, TAC-M69465, TAC-M69466, NUDOCS 9803030191 | |
| Download: ML15112A582 (4) | |
Text
Mr. W. R. McCollum 9Fruary 24, 199 Vice President, Oconee e
Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 1439
'Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - GENERIC LETTER 87-02, "SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN OPERATING PLANTS" - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TAC NOS. M69464, M69465, AND M69466)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
By letter dated December 15, 1997, you submitted information related to the verification of seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment at the Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2, and 3, in accordance with Generic Letter 87-02. As a result of our review, the staff has determined that additional information regarding operator actions specified in the report, as shown in the enclosure, is needed in order to continue our review.
Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
David E. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page Distribution:
DLaBarge RPelton 69eKdRtlpiil JZwolinski OGC PUBLIC HBerkow ACRS PD 11-2 Rdg.
LBerry LPlisco, RII R. Eckenrode GGalletti COgle, Ril 9803030191 980224 PDR ADOCK 05000269 Document Name: G:\\OCONEE\\OCO69464. RAI To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:
"C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachmentlenclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE PDII-P PDII-2/
P, 1 NAME DLa fe:cn.
LBerry Xk('
I r
DATE 2-23/98
/
98
-/-
/98 11 5
D 7
g OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
~p.R REG(,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 February 24, 1998 Mr. W. R. McCollum Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - GENERIC -LETTER 87-02, "SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN OPERATING PLANTS" - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TAC NOS. M69464, M69465, AND M69466)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
By letter dated December 15, 1997, you submitted information related to the verification of seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment at the Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2, and 3, in accordance with Generic Letter 87-02. As a result of our review, the staff has determined that additional information regarding operator actions specified in the report, as shown in the enclosure, is needed in order to continue our review.
Sincerely, David E. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/Il Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page
Oconee Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. Paul R. Newton Mr. J. E. Burchfield Legal Department (PBO5E)
Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Church Street Oconee Nuclear Site Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 J. Michael McGarry, Ill, Esquire Winston and Strawn Ms. Karen E. Long 1400 L Street, NW.
Assistant Attorney General Washington, DC 20005 North Carolina Department of Justice Mr. Robert B. Borsum P. O. Box 629 Framatome Technologies Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Suite 525 1700 Rockville Pike L. A. Keller Rockville, Maryland 20852-1631 Manager - Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Manager, LIS Duke Energy Corporation NUS Corporation 526 South Church Street 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28242-0001 Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director Senior Resident Inspector Division of Radiation Protection U. S. Nuclear Regulatory North Carolina Department of Commission Environment, Health, and 7812B Rochester Highway Natural Resources Seneca, South Carolina 29672 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Max Batavia, Chief Bureau of Radiological Health South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 County Supervisor of Oconee County Walhalla, South Carolina 29621
Request For Additional Information Verification of Seismic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1. 2. and 3
- 1.
Describe the reviews that were performed to determine if any local operator actions required to safely shut down the reactor (i.e., implement the Safe Shutdown Equipment List) could be affected by potentially adverse environmental conditions (such as loss of lighting, excessive heat or humidity, or in-plant barriers) resulting from the seismic event. Describe how staffing was evaluated and describe the reviews that were conducted to ensure operators had adequate time and resources to respond to such events.
- 2.
As part of your review, were any control room structures that could impact the operator's ability to respond to the seismic event identified? Such items might include, but are not limited to, Main Control Room ceiling tiles, nonbolted cabinets, and nonrestrained pieces of equipment (i.e., computer keyboards, monitors, stands, printers, etc.). Describe how each of these potential sources of interactions has been evaluated and describe the schedule for implementation of the final resolutions.
- 3.
Describe what reviews were performed to determine if any local operator actions were required to reposition "bad actor relays." For any such activities, describe how adverse environmental conditions (such as loss of lighting, excessive heat or humidity, or in-plant barriers) resulting from the seismic event were analyzed and dispositioned. Describe how staffing was evaluated and describe the reviews that were conducted to ensure that operators had adequate time and resources to respond to such events.
- 4.
Describe which of the operator actions associated with resetting the Safe Shutdown Equipment List equipment affected by postulated relay chatter are considered to be routine and consistent with the skill of the craft. If not considered skill of the craft, what training and operational aids were developed to ensure that the operators will perform the actions required to reset affected equipment?
- 5.
Assume the alarms associated with "bad actor relays" are expected to annunciate during the seismic event. Do the operators have to respond to those annunciators and review the annunciator response procedures associated with them for potential action?
How would those additional actions impact the operator's ability to implement the Normal, Abnormal, and Emergency Operating Procedures required to place the reactor in a safe shutdown condition?
- 6.
To the extent that Normal, Abnormal, and Emergency Operating Procedures were modified to provide plant staff with additional guidance on mitigating the A-46 Seismic Event, describe what training was required and provided to the licensed operators, nonlicensed operators, and other plant staff required to respond to such events.