ML15244A350
| ML15244A350 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15244A349 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8711100245 | |
| Download: ML15244A350 (7) | |
Text
0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ENCLOSURE SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 DOCKET NUS. 50-269,50-27U AND 50-287 GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.1 EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION PROGRAMS FOR ALL SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Generic Letter 83-28 was issued by the NRC on July 8, 1983 to indicate actions to be taken by licenses and applicants based on the generic implications of the Salem ATWS events.
Item 2.2.1 of that letter states that licensees and applicants shall describe in considerable detail their program for classifying all safety-related components other than reactor trip system (RTS) components as safety-related on plant documents and in information handling systems that are used to control plant activities that may affect these components.
Specifically, the licensee's submittal was required to contain information describing (1) the criteria used to identify these components as safety-related; (2) the information handling system which identifies the components as safety related; (3) the manner in which station personnel use this information handling system to control activities affecting these components; (4) management controls that are used to verify that the information handling system is prepared, maintained, validated, and used in accordance with approved procedures; and (5) design verification and qualification testing requirements that are part of the specifications for procurement of safety-related components.
The licensee for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 submitted responses to Generic Letter 83-28, Item 2.2.1 in submittals dated November 4, 1983, January 17, 1984 and June 9, 1987. We have evaluated these responses and find that they are acceptable.
8711100245 871104 PDR ADOCK 05000269.
P
.PDR
-2 2.0 EVALUATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS In these sections the licensee's responses to the program and each of five sub items are individually evaluated against guidelines developed by the staff and conclusions are drawn regarding their individual and collective acceptability.
- 1. Identification Criteria Guideline:
The licensee's response should describe the criteria used to identify safety-related equipment and components.
(Item 2.2.1.1)
Evaluation:
The licensee's response gives the criteria for identifying safety-related equipment and components. A component is considered safety-related if it is required to assure: (a) the integrity of the reactor coolant system pressure boundary, (b) the capability to achieve and maintain a safe shutdown, or (c) the capability to prevent or to mitigate the consequences of an accident which could result in potential offsite exposures.
Additionally, the licensee has identified other considerations and guidance that are used in determining the classification of safety-related structures, systems and components.
==
Conclusion:==
We find the stated criteria meet the staff's requirements and are acceptable.
- 2. Information Handling System Guideline: The licensee's response should confirm that the equipment classification program includes an information handling system that is
-3 used to identify safety-related equipment and components. Approved procedures which govern its development, maintenance, and validation should exist.
(Item 2.2.1.2)
Evaluation:
The licensee states that the Station Manual (the equipment classification information handling system) was developed, verified and is used in accordance with written procedures and administrative controls. It also received an interdepartmental review to ensure completeness and accuracy.
The licensee also defines the process used in revising the Station Manual.
This is done in accordance with a procedure contained within the Licensing Section Manual.
==
Conclusion:==
We find the licensee's response meets the staff requirements and is acceptable.
- 3. Use of Information Handling System Guideline: The licensee response should confirm that their equipment classification program includes criteria and procedures which govern the use of the information handling system to determine that an activity is safety-related and that safety-related procedures for maintenance, surveillance, parts replacement and other activities defined in the introduction to 10CFR5O, Appendix B, are applied to safety related components. (Item 2.2.1.3)
Evaluation:
The licensee's response provided a description of the station personnel's use of the Oconee Nuclear Station Quality Standards Manual for Structures, Systems and Components. This manual contains the equipment classification
listings. A criteria checklist for the determination of the equipment classificdtion was also included. This determines safety-related items.
If an item is not shown to be non-safety-related, it is assumed to be safety-related. Documentation packages for the above listed activities in the Guideline receive an interdisciplinary (including quality assurance) review to determine that the proper procedures are used with safety-related activities.
==
Conclusion:==
We conclude that the licensee has described plant administrative control-s and program which meet the staff requirements for this item and are acceptable.
- 4. Management Controls Guideline:
The licensee/applicant should confirm that management controls used to verify that the procedures for preparation, validation, and routine utilization of the information handling system have been and are being followed.
(Item 2.2.1.4)
Evaluation:
The licensee's response states that management procedures and controls cover the utilization of the safety-related or quality standards documents at each station. The Administrative Policy Manual for Nuclear Stations contains requirements for determining the safety-related status of an affected item.
Each activity such as station modification, maintenance, procedure development and revision, and procurement requires the determination and documentation of the safety status of the affected item and appropriate management approval is received in the documentation package. All documentation packages for activities affecting a safety-related structure, system, or component receive an interdisciplinary station review including the Quality Assurance Department.
-5
==
Conclusion:==
We find this description of the licensee's program of management control meets the staff requirements and is acceptable.
- 5. Design Verification and Procurement Guideline:
The licensee/applicant's response should document that past usage demonstrates that appropriate design verification and qualification testing is specified for the procurement of safety-related components and parts. The specifications should include qualification testing for expected safety service conditions and provide support for licensee's receipt of testing documentation which supports the limits of life recommended by the supplier. If such documentation is not available, confirmation that the present program meets these requirements should be provided. (Item 2.2.1.5)
Evaluation:
The licensee's submittals address procurement activities, and state that procurement specifications for safety-related components require the appropriate design verification and qualification testing. The licensee addresses surveillance activities and preventive maintenance that verifies that components do not exceed their service life. The licensee states that replacement safety-related components and parts are purchased as a direct replacement item, whether from the original or an alternate vendor, or by use of an industry standard part number.
==
Conclusion:==
We find this information describes the licensee's program which meets staff requirements and is acceptable.
-6
- 6. "Important To Safety" Components Guideline:
Generic Letter 83-28 states that licensee/applicant equipment classification programs.should include (in addition to the safety-related components) a broader class of components designated as "Important to Safety."
However, since the generic letter does not require licensee/
applicant to furnish this information as part of their response, staff review of this sub-item will not be performed. (Item 2.2.1.6)
- 7. Program Guideline:
Licensees/applicants should confirm that an equipment classification program exists which provides assurance that all safety-related components are designated as safety-related on plant documents such as drawings, procedures, system descriptions, test and maintenance instructions, operating procedures, and information handling systems so that personnel who perform activities that affect such safety-related components are aware that they are working on safety-related components and are guided by safety-related procedures and constraints. (Item 2.2.1)
Evaluation:
The licensee's response to these requirements was contained in submittals dated November 4, 1983, January 17, 1984 and June 9, 1987. These submittals describe the licensee's program for identifying and classifying safety-related equipment and components which meets the staff requirements as indicated in the preceding sub-item evaluations.
==
Conclusion:==
We conclude that the licensee's program addresses the staff concerns regarding equipment and.component classification and is acceptable.
3.0 REFERENCES
- 1. NRC Letter, D. G. Eisenhut to all Licensees of Operating Reactors, Applicants for Operating License, and Holders of Construction Permits, "Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events (Generic Letter 83-28)," July 8, 1983.
- 2. Duke Power Company letter, H. B. Tucker to H. R. Denton, NRC, November 4, 1983.
- 3. Duke Power Company letter, H. B. Tucker to H. R. Denton, NRC, January 17, 1984.
- 4. Duke Power Company letter, H. B. Tucker to NRC, June 9, 1987.