ML17263A684

Summary of 940603 Meeting W/Cooperative Efforts Group in Rockville,Md Re Proposed Graded Approach Response to GL 89-10.List of Attendees Encl

ML17263A684
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello, Kewaunee, Point Beach, Prairie Island, Ginna
Issue date:	06/03/1994
From:	Wetzel B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
GL-89-10, NUDOCS 9406100302
Download: ML17263A684 (30)

Text

~

kg v

~

June 3,

1994 Docket Nos.

50-244, 50-263, 50-266, 50-301, 50-282, 50-306, and 50-305 LICENSEES:

Cooperative Efforts Group FACILITIES:

Honticello, Prairie Island 1&2, Kewaunee, Point Beach

182, and Ginna Nuclear Power Plants

SUMMARY

OF MEETING -

GRADED APPROACH FOR GENERIC LETTER 89-10, SAFETY-RELATED MOTOR-OPERATED VALVE (MOV) TEST AND SURVEILLANCE The staff met with the Cooperative Efforts Group on Hay 5,

1994, at NRC Headquarters to discuss their proposed graded approach response to Generic Letter (GL) 89-10.

This meeting was the third in a series of meetings held on this topic.

The previous meetings were held on June 7 and October 18, 1993.

The Cooperative Efforts Group consists of the following utilities:

Northern States

Power, Wisconsin Electric Power, Wisconsin Public Service, and Rochester Gas and Electric.

A complete list of attendees is attached as Enclosure 1 and a copy of the presentation slides is attached as Enclosure 2.

Representatives from Northern States Power presented the graded approach to HOV testing as it pertains to the Monticello plant's MOV testing program.

Specific topics discussed included:

Supplement 6 of GL 89-10, classification of important versus lesser important valves and the types of periodic testing to be performed.

At the conclusion of the meeting representatives from each of the licensees discussed their specific schedules for closeout of GL 89-10 issues.

Enclosures:

1.

List of Attendees 2.

Overhead Slides 2

cc:

w/enclosures See next page Original signed by Beth A. Wetzel, Acting Project Manager Project Directorate III-1 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation OFFICE LA:PD31 CJamerson PH: PD31 BWetzel: ll PD: PD31 LHarsh DATe 06/ 3 9

06/g 94 06 $

94 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY F ILENAHE: G: iWPDOCSiMONTICELiMOHEETIN.SUH 9406100302 940h03 I

I PDR ADQCK 05000244I P

PDR t

"P 0

P I (

l'

A

~

~

c r

{~

C Northern States Power Company CC:

Honticello Nuclear Generating Plant and Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Hr. Roger 0. Anderson, Director Licensing and Management Issues Northern States Power Company 414 Nicollet Hall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 J.

E. Silberg, Esquire

Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N.

W.

Washington DC 20037 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector Office 2807 W. County Road 75 Honticello, Minnesota 55362 Site General Manager Honticello Nuclear Generating Plant Northern States Power Company 2807 W. County Road 75 Honticello, Minnesota 55362 Robert Nelson, President Minnesota Environmental Control Citizens Association (MECCA) 1051 South HcKnight Road St.

Paul, Minnesota 55119 Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St.

Paul, Minnesota 55119 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 Commissioner of Health Minnesota Department of Health 717 Delaware Street, S.

E.

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 Darla Groshens, Auditor/Treasurer Wright County Government Center 10 NW Second Street BufFalo, Minnesota 55313 Kris Sanda, Commissioner Department of Public Service 121 Seventh Place East Suite 200 St.

Paul, Minnesota 55101-2145 Lisa R. Tiegel Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division Suite 200 520 Lafayette Road St,

Paul, Minnesota 55155 Hr.

E. L. Watzl, Site General Manager Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Northern States Power Company 1717 Wakonade Drive East Welch, Minnesota 55089 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector Office 1719 Wakonade Drive East Welch, Minnesota 55089-9642 Mr. Jeff Cole, Auditor/Treasurer Goodhue County Courthouse Box 408 Red Wing, Minnesota 55066-0408 Site Licensing Honticello Nuclear Generating Plant Northern States Power Company 2807 W. County Road 75 Honticello, Minnesota 55362 Site Licensing Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Northern States Power Company 1717 Wakonade Drive East Welch, Minnesota 55089 April 1994

~

~

)l Wisconsin Public Service Corporation t

Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant CC:

Hr.

C. A. Schrock Hanager Nuclear Engineering Wisconsin Public Service Corporation Post Office Box 19002 Green Bay, Wisconsin 54037-9002 Foley 5 Lardner Attention:

Hr. Bradley D. Jackson One South Pinckney Street P. 0.

Box 1497

Hadison, Wisconsin 53701-1497 Chairman Town of Carlton Route 1

Kewaunee, Wisconsin 54216 Hr. Harold Reckelberg, Chairman Kewaunee County Board Kewaunee County Courthouse

Kewaunee, Wisconsin 54216 Chairman Public Service Commission of Wisconsin Hill Farms State Office Building

Hadison, Wisconsin 53702 Attorney General 114 East, State Capitol

Hadison, Wisconsin 53702 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspectors Office Route ¹I, Box 999

Kewaunee, Wisconsin 54216 Regional Administrator - Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532-4531 Hr. Robert S. Cullen Chief Engineer Wisconsin Public Service Commission P. 0.

Box 7854

Hadison, Wisconsin 53707

(t 4

1l li

, M

)

rJ i,

1 J

pf

Point Beach Nuclear Plant Wisconsin Electric

Power, Company Unit Nos.

1 and 2

CC:

Hr. Robert E. Link, Vice President Nuclear Power Department Wisconsin Electric

Power, Company 231 West Michigan Street, Room P379 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201 Ernest'.

Blake, Jr.

Shaw, Pittm'an, Potts

& Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N.W.

Washington,,DC 20037'r.

Gregory J. Maxfield,",Manager Point Beach Nuclear Plant'isconsin Electric Power Company 6610 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241 Town Chairman Town of Two Creeks Route 3

Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241 Chairman Public Service Commission of Wisconsin Hills Farms State Office Building Madison, Wisconsin 53702 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 Resident Inspector's Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6612 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241

r p

v i,

l I

1 I'

i V

41 I

1t I

l

R.E.

Ginna Nuclear Power Plant CC:

Thomas A. Moslak, Senior Resident Inspector R.E.

Ginna Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1503 Lake Road,

Ontario, New York 14519 Regional Administrator, Region,I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Ms.

Donna Ross Division of Policy Analysis

& Planning New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223 Charlie Donaldson, Esq.

Ass'istant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, New York 10271 Nicholas S,

Reynolds Winston

& Strawn 1400 L St.

N.W.

Washington, DC 20005-3502 Ms. Thelma Wideman

Director, Wayne County Emergency Management Office Wayne County Emergency Operations Center 7370 Route 31

Lyons, New York 14489 Ms. Mary Louise Meisenzahl Administrator, Monroe County Office of Emergency Preparedness 111 West Fall

Road, Room 11 Rochester, New York 14620

ENCLOSURE 1

I4>>4 Coo erative EfForts Grou Meetin List of Attendees Name Or anization L. Marsh B. Sheron B. Wetzel T. Scarbrough A. Johnson G. Johnson C.

Bajwa M. Khanna S.

Long J.

Hannon R. Laufer L. Gundrum R. Anderson R. Mecredy G. Krieser K. Peterson D. Blanchard G. Wrobel S. Katradis A. Wyche C. Schrock W. Hall D. Tilly NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC Northern States Power Rochester Gas

& Electric Wisconsin Electric Northern States Power TENERA Rochester Gas

& Electric NUS Corporation Bechtel Wisconsin Public Service NEI Northern States Power

'A kl

(

oo era ive o

s rou ee in Graded Approach to Implementing GL 89-10, Including Supplement 6 Pln IO C/)

Pl

88flflg VOI'VEGA I

~ Introductions I

Purpose ofMeeting

~ Supplement 6 and the Graded Approach Schedule Grouping Scope MOVTesting Periodi'c Verification 2, Post-Maint. Testing I

~ Summarv

~ Supplement 6 describes the information needed by the staff to justi a commitment date change.

The Graded Approach provides a means tojustify a schedule change.

~ Status ofMOVTest Program at Monticello.

c e ue con'f-latus o Monticello MOVProgram

~ 60 MOVs in program.

~ 33 MOVs through static testing; 19 MOVs through dynamic testing.

~ Initial cycle to be completed by the end of'94 next refueling outage begins in September

~ No significant design errors or MOVoperability issues have been identified through the testing program to date.

Sc educe con't-Detai ed tatus or Monitce lo lm ortant Valves Less lm ortant Valves Total y Total Number I

Valves Statically Tested 31 24 29 60 33 Valves Practicable to Test I

Valves Dynamically Tested 25 16 10 35 Test Com letion Schedule Static Tests Remaining 20

• 27 Dynamic Tests Remaining 16

MOVGroapinf,

~ Supplement 6 offers an alternative to testing all valves through the use of "grouping."

Opportunities or grouping are very limited.

The Cooperative E orts Group has chosen toe use the Graded Approach as another means to optimize ihe testing e ort.

co@can t e Useo P ta ies

~ Supplement 6 states that PRA studies should not be used as "the sole basis for eliminating safety-related MOVs from the GL 89-10 program.",

Graded Approach does not use PRA as the "sole basis" for determining MOVimportance.

Also, the Graded Approach does not "eliminate" any safety-related MOVs from our programs.

Sco e and the Use o I'R4 Studies con 't I

I

~ Supplement 6 infers that PRA studies are not well-'suited to reveal design errors.

The Cooperative E orts Group concurs-PR4 is not going to snd design errors.

Once

,postulated, the PRA is an excellent tool or evaluating the risk signi seance o design errors on a component-by-component

basis, both individually and collectively.

l 1087-017.pre/F94A

Sco e and the Use o I'RA Studies con 't

~ Supplement 6 specifically recognizes the use of PRA results for prioritization.

Graded Approach combines deterministic and PRA assessments to prioritize and determine the extent oftesting rigor to apply to MOVs.

8'e believe this is consistent with the overall NRC

&industry direction as seen in:

- Dec. 3, 1993 NRC letterfrom Russell to Tipton,

- maintenance Rule, and

- Graded Approach to Quality Assurance.

M VTesting Supplement 6 provides general guidance on the extentlrigor ofdynamic testing.

Graded Approach provides additional justificationforprecluding dynamic testing for less important MOVs which are impracticable to test.

1087-017.pre/F94A Also, the Graded Approach recognizes when there is no measurable benefit to conducting dynamic testing even when practicable using the same approach.

csl lFlg OFL f xamp e I MO-2002l2003; RHR Heat Exchanger Bypass Valves Train A and B;

~ Engineering Analysis used within the Graded Approach includes a number ofelements.

MOVTesting: Exam@ e Con't-En 'neeIing Anulysis Elements

~ Design/Functionality Assessment Operational Scenarios Expected Conditions Safety 2 Risk Significance I

~ Performance Analysis

Test/Maintenance/Reliability History GL 89-10 Static/Dynamic Testing Results MOVMargin Assessment

~ Other Considerations Performance of Similar MOVs Industry Data (other plants and EPRI)

MOUTesting: Examp e Con't M -2002 2003 Engineering dna ysis

~ For those valves not dynamically tested, the minimum required thrust willbe increased to account for the rate ofloading.

~ Al'1 other set-up parameters willremain the same.

~

~ Assumed values for statically tested valves willbe verified using the two-stage approach.

~

g ~

~

~

~

~

EXAMPLE: MO-2002/2003 Design/Functionality Assessment MO-2002/2003; RHR Heat Exchanger Bypass Valve; 14"Anchor Darling Globe Valve.

Deterministic Assessment These valves provide a means of regulating flow through each of the redundant RHR trains to control RHR flow temperature when the RHR system is operating in the decay heat removal mode.

These valves are normally keylocked in the open position.

The design basis function for the Bypass valves is to open on a LPSI auto-initiation signal to maximize the flow to the core.

The EOPs call for operators to close the Bypass valves in each working train of RHR to maximize flow through the heat exchangers to remove decay heat in the primary loop for the cooling mode of RHR operation.

A calculation has been performed to demonstrate that this step is nonessential; i.e., the reduced flow through the heat exchangers was determined to be sufficient to adequately remove decay heat.

0 erational Scenarios/Ex ected Conditions Valve Open:

The valve is opened to terminate torus cooling, the RHR system is operating with at least one pump and valves are in their normal positions for this mode of RHR operation.

The differential pressure across the valve is equal to the pressure drop across the heat exchanger and associated components:

MEDP (open) = 18 psid P (max)

= 145 psi Q (flow)

= 8000 gpm T (max)

= 182 F V (min)

= 426 VAC Valve Closed:

The RHR system is operating with at least one pump in the Suppression Pool Cooling mode with the Bypass valves open.

When the Bypass valves are required to close, the differential pressure across the valve is equal to the pressure drop across the heat exchanger and associated components:

MEDP (cls)

= 18 psid P (max)

= 145 psi Q (flow),

" = 8000 gpm T '(max)

= 182 F-V (min)

= 426 VAC

v ~

~

~

EXAMPLE:MO-2002/2003 Performance Analysis Minimum Re uired Thrust CST

+

Total Measure Uncertainty:

inc: Torq Switch Repeat (5%)

Equip Uncert

• TCF (10%)

Extrapolation Error (0%)

+ Margin for Rate of Loading

+ Margin for Lube Degradation Total Uncertainty Minimum Torque Switch Setpoint No DP Test 2996 (15%)

(s%)

(31%)

4342 DP Tested 2996

(11%)

NA (s%)

(16%)

3567 Maximum Thrust CST educed Volta e 43981 Total Measure Uncertainty:

(11%)

inc: Torq Switch Repeat (5%)

Equip Uncert

• TCF (10%)

Extrapolation Error (0%)

43981 (11%)

Maximum Torque Switch Setpoint Maximum Allowable Thrust Total Measure Uncertainty:

inc: Torq Switch Repeat (5%)

Equip Uncert ~ TCF (10%)

Extrapolation Error (0%)

Maximum Torque Switch Setpoint Minimum Available Thrust Re uired Minimum Torque Switch Setpoint Calculated Packing Load 39622 75000 (11%)

67567 4342 546 39622 75000 (11%)

67567 3567 546 Minimum Available Thrust Required 3796 Maximum Tor ue CST educed Volta e 1046 Torque Measure Uncertainty:

(15.8%)

inc: Torq Switch Repeat (5%)

Equip Uncert (15%)

3021 1046 (15.8%)

Maximum Torque @ CST 903 903

EXAMPLE:MO-2002/2003 Other Considerations DP TESTED VALVES NON DP TESTED VALVES.

Test data is reviewed:

Assumed values are verified to be conservative using:

• Valve factors

• Stem friction factors

• Lube degradation (iftested)

• Rate of Loading

1. Plant specific data

2. EPRI data

3. Industry data Ifparameters exceed values assumed in calculations similar valves will be reviewed.

The above sources will be searched for similar valves under similar flow conditions.

Periodic Veri Ication and Post-Maintenance Testing Supplement 6 provides general guidance on testing after the initial cycle.

Graded Approach provides frameworkfovjustifying static testing to periodically demonstrate design-basis capability, assessing safety significance to determine appropriate frequency ofpeviodic testing, ~

arid determining degree ofvigor applied in assessing MOVoperabilityfollowingsignificant maintenance.

II By consideving MOVperformance and importance, the Cooperative Efforts Group believes the Graded Approach is consistent with the Maintenance Rule.

ammary

~ Grouping has provided limited benefit in optimizing program scope for the Cooperative Efforts Group.

~ Graded Approach is a balanced approach: deterministic and probabilistic. It seeks to focus resources to improve safety arid reliability.

Graded Approach is consistent with original purpose of GL S9-1Q, and new industry initiatives.

~ The Cooperative Efforts Group utilities willsoon be making submittals in which our MOVPrograms are redefined using the Graded Approach.

MEETING

SUMMARY

DISTRIBUTION FOR MEETING HELD ON MAY 5 1994:

DATED:

3une 3, 1994 DISTRIBUTION W ENCLOSURES 1

EE 2:

Docket File,'RC 8 Local PDRs PD31 Reading File M. Phillips, RIII B. Wetzel M. Gamberoni A. Hansen A. Johnson, 14Dl DISTRIBUTION W ENCLOSURE 1

ONLY:

W. Russell/F.

Miraglia L. Reyes J.

Roe J. Zwolinski L. Marsh C. Jamerson OGC E. Jordan, MNBB 3701 B. Sheron, 7D26 T. Scarbrough, 7E23 A. Johnson, 1401 G. Johnson, 7E23 C.

Bajwa M. Khanna, 7E23 S.

Long, 10E4 J.

Hannon, R. Laufer L. Gundrum ACRS (10)

B. McCabe, EDO cc:

Licensee 8 Service list

M