ML18152A261
| ML18152A261 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry, North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 12/08/1994 |
| From: | Gibson A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Ohanlon J VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| GL-89-10, NUDOCS 9412280150 | |
| Download: ML18152A261 (26) | |
Text
\\.
December 8, 1994 Virginia Electric and Power Company ATTN:
Mr. J.- P. O'Hanlon Senior Vice President - Nuclear Innsbrook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
MOTOR-OPERATED VALVE ISSUES WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THE PROCESS FOR CLOSING OUT GENERIC LETTER 89-10 Gentlemen:
On November 8, 1994, Region II and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) held a meeting with all Region II licensees/applicants on the closeout process for Generic Letter 89-10 (GL 89-10), Motor-Operated Valves.
During this meeting Region II and NRR representatives provided the staff position on GL 89-10 closeout and answered questions on the inspection process.
Handouts presented during this meeting are enclosed.
Periodic verification of motor-operated valve performance, after completion of GL 89-10 closeout, was an area of concern voiced by the audience.
Many licensee representatives expressed their concern about continued dynamic testing of motor-operated valves after completion of the closeout process with little to no benefit.
In response, the NRC staff agreed to revisit this issue and provide further information during future industry meetings.
This meeting was a valuable contribution to improving communications between the NRC and licensees/applicants.
I want to express my gratitude for all those who attended.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Docket Nos.:
50-338, 50-339, 50-280, 50-281 Licensee Nos.:
Enclosure:
Handouts Sincerely, Original signed by Bruce S. Mallett for:
Albert F. Gibson, Director Division of Reactor Safety
SEND TO PDR?
Yes VEPCO Distribution w/encls:
R. McWhorter, SRI M. Branch, SRI PUBLIC OFC NAME DATE No COPY?
OFFIC!At RECORD COPY 2
RI I :DRS I
/94 No Yes
~
Yes No DOCUMENT NAME:
A:\\MOVGL.LTR
e PROCESS FOR CLOSURE OF STAFF REVIEW OF GENERIC LETTER 89-10 PROGRAMS AND PERIODIC VERIFICATION OF MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY TERENCE L. CHAN CHIEF, COMPONENTS AND TESTING SECTION MECHANICAL ENGINEERING BRANCH OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
PROCESS FOR CLOSURE OF STAFF REVIEW OF GENERIC LETTER 89-10 PROGRAMS PURSUANT.TO 10 CFR 50.54(F), GL 89-10 STATES THAT LICENSEES SHALL NOTIFY NRC IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF GL 89-10 DESIGN-BASIS VERIFICATION.
NRC STAFF MEMORANDUM DATED JULY 12, 1994, DESCRIBES-THE PROCESS FOR CLOSURE OF THE STAFF'S REVIEW OF THE' DESIGN-BASIS VERIFICATION PORTION OF LICENSEES' GL 89-10 PROGRAMS.
WHEN A LICENSEE NOTIFIES NRC OF COMPLETION OF ITS-GL 89-10 PROGRAM, NRR PROJECT MANAGER WILL SET UP DISCUSSION BETWEEN NRR TECHNICAL STAFF AND REGION STAFF TO DISCUSS CLOSURE OF NRC STAFF REVIEW OF GL 89-10 PROGRAM.
FOLLOWING THOSE DISCUSSIONS, NRR PROJECT MANAGER WILL NOTIFY LICENSEE OF ANY NECESSARY INFORMATION TD CLOSE GL.89-10 OR SET-UP TELEPHONE CONFERENCE-TO DISCUSS CLOSURE OF STAFF REVIEW-~ BY INSPECTION OR LICENSEE SUBMITTAL.
UPON SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF NRC STAFF REVIEW, STAFF WILL CLOSE GL.89-10 REVIEW THROUGH LETTER FROM NRR PROJECT MANAGER OR COVER LETTER OF INSPECTION REPORT.
SUPPLEMENTAL INSPECTION GUIDANCE FOR CLOSURE OF STAFF REVIEW OF GL 89-10 PROGRAMS 04.04 SELECT SAMPLE OF MOVs FOR DETAILED REVIEW FROM THE POPULATION OF MOVs IN THE GL 89-10.
PROGRAM.
LICENSEE IS EXPECTED TO HAVE VERIFIED DESIGN--
BASIS CAPABILITY OF EACH MOV IN ITS GL 89-10 PROGRAM.
LICENSEE SHOULD HAVE AVAILABLE SPECIFIC STATUS FOR EACH GL 89-10 MOV.
PWR LICENSEE MAY DEFER CONSIDERATION OF VALV~
MISPOSITIONING.
STAFF REVIEW MAY BE CLOSED-IF LICENSEE COMMITS TO CONSIDER MISPOSITIONING IN THE EVENT.THAT STAFF DETERMINES-THIS RECOMMENDATION REMAINS APPROPRIATE.
04.05 VERIFY THAT LICENSEE HAS PERFORMED DESIGN-*
BASIS REVIEWS OF SAMPLED MOVs.
INSPECTORS WILL ASSESS THE. PROGRESS BEING MADE~BY LICENSEES IN ADDRESSING PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING OF GATE-VALVES-.
SUPPLEMENT 6 TO GL 89-10 PROVIDES INFORMATION:-
ON PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING OF-GATE VALVES.
SUPPLEMENTAL INSPECTION GUIDANCE (CONTINUED) 04.06 VERIFY THAT LICENSEE HAS ADEQUATELY SIZED SAMPLED MOVs.
INFORMATION ON SIZING AND SETTING PROVIDED IN~
APRIL 30, 1993, MEMORANDUM FROM NRR TO REGIONS AND IN SUPPLEMENT-6 TO GL 89-10.
04.07 VERIFY THAT LICENSEE. HAS DEMONSTRATED DESIGN--
BASIS CAPABILITY OF SAMPLED MOVs.
INSPECTORS WILL VERIFY IMPLEMENTATION OF LICENSEE ACTIONS IN RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT-5::
TO~ GL 89--10 ON MOV DIAGNOSTIC EQUIPMENT ACCURACY.
INSPECTORS WILL ASSESS ADEQUACY OF" LICENSEE'S TREATMENT.OFMEASUREMENT ERROR IN~
THE:ANALYSIS OF TEST DATA AND TORQUE SWITCH~
SETPOINT. ANALYSIS-.
SUPPLEMENT. 6 TO GL_ 89.-10. PROVIDES. INFORMATION.
ON DEMONSTRATION OF MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY, INCLUDING GROUPING.
04.08 VERIFY THAT THE LICENSEE HAS ESTABLISHED A METHOD FOR PERIODIC VERIFICATION.
[DETAILS ON A FOLLOWING SLIDE]
e SUPPLEMENTAL INSPECTION GUIDANCE.
(CONTINUED) 04.09 VERIFY THAT LICENSEE HAS ANALYZED MOV FAILURES AND HAS EFFECTIVE CORRECTIVE.ACTION-PLAN, AND THAT LICENSEE TRENDS MOV FAILURES~
INSPECTORS WILL.CONSIDER LICENSEE RESPONSE:TO:
NRC INFORMATION NOTICES, INDUSTRY TECHNICAL AND MAINTENANCE UPDATES, AND 10 CFR PART 21-NOTICES.
04.10 VERIFY THAT THE LICENSEE 1s* MEETING PROGRAM, SCHEDULE.
SUPPLEMENT 6 TO GL 89-10 PROVIDES GUIDANCE:.
FOR LICENSEES THAT CANNOT MEET GL 89-10 SCHEDULE COMMITMENTS*.
04.11 VERIFY QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION IN DESIGN CONTROL. AND-TESTING:..
PREVIOUS INSPECTION ISSUES INSPECTORS WILL. REVIEW RESOLUTION OF-PREVIous**
INSPECTION ISSUES, SUCH AS JUSTIFICATION FOR THE~
GL 89-10 PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS (VALVE FACTOR, STEM FRICTION COEFFICIENT, LOAD SENSITIVE BEHAVIOR, AND OTHERS)
e POST CLOSEOUT INSPECTIONS
- 1.
REACTIVE. -
LIMITED - WILL TYPICALLY ADDRESS ADEQUACY OF FAILURE EVALUATIONS AND-CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
- 2.
MAINTENANCE RULE BROAD - PERIODIC VERIFICATION, TRENDING-,
LUBRICATION, POST.
MAINTENANCE/MODIFICATION TESTING, ETC:..
- 3.
POSSIBLE FOLLOWUP MODULE
e CLOSURE OF NRC STAFF REVIEW OF GENERIC LETTER 89-10 PROGRAMS
\\
THOMAS G. SCARBROUGH MECHANICAL ENGINEERING BRANCH OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
STATUS OF GENERIC LETTER 89-10 CLOSURE STAFF COMPLETED OUR REVIEW OF THE GL 89-10 PROGRAM AT THE CALLAWAY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT.
OTHER NUCLEAR PLANTS THAT HAVE NOTIFIED THE STAFF OF.
THE COMPLETION OF THE DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY VERIFICATION.PORTION OF THEIR GL 89-10 PROGRAMS INCLUDE:
COMANCHE PEAK 1 AND 2 FARLEY 1 AND 2 HARRIS HOPE CREEK PALO VERDE 3 PRAIRIE ISLAND 1 AND 2 SOUTH TEXAS 1 AND 2 WATERFORD CRYSTAL RIVER FORT CALHOUN HATCH 1 AND 2 LIMERICK 1.
POINT BEACH 1 AND 2 ROBINSON TURKEY POINT 3.
BASED ON AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LICENSEE AND NRC STAFF, FORT CALHOUN IS SUBMITTING INFORMATION TO_
JUSTIFY CLOSURE OF THE STAFF REVIEW OF ITS GL 89-10:
PROGRAM.
SOUTH TEXAS AND WATERFORD HAVE UNDERGONE GL 89-10 CLOSE-our* INSPECTIONS AND THE STAFF IS NEARING CLOSURE OF-OUR GL 89-10 REVIEW.
TMI AND MAINE YANKEE INITIALLY NOTIFIED THE STAFF.
THAT THEY BELIEVED THAT THEIR GL 89-10 PROGRAMS.WERE~
COMPLETE, BUT SUBSEQUENT INSPECTIONS REVEALED THAT-ADDITIONAL WORK WAS NECESSARY.
THESE LICENSEES ARE-SUBMITTING SCHEDULE EXTENSION JUSTIFICATIONS.
PRINCIPAL LICENSEE ACTIONS FOR CLOSURE OF STAFF REVIEW OF GL 89-10 PROGRAMS MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY LICENSEE JUSTIFIES DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY FOR EACH MOV IN GL 89-10 PROGRAM AND HAS ESTABLISHED A PROCESS FOR OBTAINING FURTHER INFORMATION -WHERE. Nor*
SATISFIED WITH JUSTIFICATION FOR CERTAIN MOVs.
.~--- -~
PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING LICENSEE DEMONSTRATES PROGRESS BEING MADE TO RESOLVE:
CONCERN ABOUT POTENTIAL.PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL.
BINDING OF* GATE VALVES-~
PWR VALVE MISPOSITIONING PWR LICENSEE. CONSIDERS VALVE MISPOSITIONING, OR COMMITS.TO CONSIDER VALVE. MISPOSITIONING IF STAFF~
DETERMINES~ THAT-THIS RECOMMENDATlON REMAINS:
APPROPRIATE*.
PERIODIC VERIFICATION OF MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY*-
LICENSEE ESTABLISHES LONG-TERM PLAN FOR PERIODIC.
VERIFICATION THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT DEGRADATION OF DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY WILL BE IDENTIFIED.
EXAMPLES OF ACCEPTABLE PERIODIC VERIFICATION PLAN~.
FOR GL 89-10 CLOSURE ARE (1) DYNAMIC DIAGNOSTIC TESTING, OR (2) STATIC DIAGNOSTIC.TESTING WITH MARGIN BASED ON PLANT-SPECIFIC DYNAMIC TESTING.
LICENSEE ACTIONS (CONTINUED)
JUSTIFICATION OF PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS LICENSEE JUSTIFIES ASSUMPTIONS USED IN THE GL.89-10~
PROGRAM, SUCH AS A.
VALVE FACTOR (INCLUDING AREA ASSUMPTION)
B.
STEM FRICTION COEFFICIENT C.
LOAD SENSITIVE BEHAVIOR D.
MARGINS FOR STEM LUBRICATION DEGRADATION AND SPRINGPACK RELAXATION E.
MOTOR PERFORMANCE FACTORS (1) MOTOR RATING (2) EFFICIENCIES. USED IN OPEN AND CLOSE.*
DIRECTIONS (3) APPLICATION FACTOR (4) POWER FACTOR USED IN DEGRADED VOLTAGE CALCULATIONS F.
BASIS-FOR-EXTRAPOLATION METHOD OF PARTIAL DIP~
THRUST MEASUREMENTS G.
TORQUE SWITCH REPEATABILITY H.
USE OF LIMITORQUE, KALSI, OR OTHER SOURCES FOR--
INCREASING THRUST AND TORQUE ALLOWABLE~ LIMITS-I.
EQUIPMENT ERROR
~
J.
POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING, ESPECIALLY VALVE PACKING ADJUSTMENTS K.
GROUPING OF MOVs L.
TRENDING OF MOV PROBLEMS.
e LICENSEE ACTIONS (CONTINUED)
RESOLVE GL 89-10 INSPECTION FINDINGS LICENSEE RESOLVES FINDINGS FROM PREVIOUS GL 89-10 INSPECTIONS.
IN GENERAL, MOST SIGNIFICANT GL 89-10 INSPECTION CONCERNS HAVE BEEN:
Cl) STATUS OF DYNAMIC TESTING; (2) TEST ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA; (3) OPERABILITY/REPORTABILITY DETERMINATIONS; (4) FEEDBACK OF TEST RESULTS; AND (5) EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL FOR PRESSURE: LOCKING~
AND THERMAL BINDING OF GATE VALVES.
OTHER LICENSEE ACTIVITIES FOUND TO NEED IMPROVEMENT:
(1) VALIDATION OF ASSUMPTIONS IN MOV SIZING.ANO:.
SETTING CALCULATIONS; (2) JUSTIFICATION OF MOV GROUPING FOR TESTING-PURPOSES; (3) VERIFICATION OF' EXTRAPOLATION METHODS-- FOR-TEST DATA; (4) EVALUATION OF DIAGNOSTIC TRACE-ANOMALIES-;
(5) INVOLVEMENT-OF- 0A IN VERIFYING TEST DATA AND~
ANALYSES ACCURACY; (6) JUSTIFICATION FOR METHOD TO PERIODICALLY VERIFY DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY; (7) CORRECTIVE ACTION IN RESPONSE TO MOV PROBLEMS; AND (8) POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES THAT MIGHT AFFECT MOV PERFORMANCE:
UNDER DYNAMIC CONDITIONS.
LICENSEE ACTIONS (CONTINUED)
ADDRESS CURRENT MOV ISSUES AND CONCERNS LICENSEE RECOGNIZES AND HAS PLAN TO ADDRESS CURRENT.
MOV ISSUES AND CONCERNS, SUCH AS ACTUAL TORQUE OUTPUT OF LIMITORQUE ACTUATORS LOWER THAN ANTICIPATED.
REDUCTION IN DC AND AC MOTOR SPEED DURING OPERATION UNDER DEGRADED VOLTAGE, DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE, AND HIGH AMBIENT TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS.
ENSURING THE CAPABILITY OF MOV TO RETURN TO SAFETY POSITION FOLLOWING TESTING IF MOV IS ASSUMED TO BE OPERABLE DURING TESTING.
EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS OF. MOTOR..
STALL.AND THERMAL OVERLOAD TRIP, INCLUDING STRUCTURAL AND MOTOR DAMAGE.
CHAFING OF WIRES INSIDE LIMIT SWITCH COMPARTMENT" CAN CAUSE LOSS OF FUNCTION.~
GLOBE VALVE THRUST REQUIREMENTS FOR PUMPED FLOW-APPARENTLY CONTROLLED BY SEAT OR GUIDE AREAS.
INDUSTRY GLOBE VALVE.SLOWDOWN TESTING SHOWED SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THRUST REQUIREMENTS THAN PREDICTED.
INDUSTRY AND NRC-SPONSORED GATE VALVE SLOWDOWN TESTING SHOWED SOME VALVES TO HAVE UNPREDICTABLE-BEHAVIOR.
e CALLAWAY GL 89-10 PROGRAM GL 89-10 PROGRAM SCOPE:
150 MOVs DYNAMICALLY TESTED:
103 MOVs DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY OF MOVs NOT DYNAMICALLY TESTED BASED ON GROUPING WITH OTHER TESTED MOVs AT.
CALLAWAY AND OTHER SOURCES.
PERIODIC VERIFICATION:
MOVs STATIC TESTED USING DIAGNOSTICS EVERY 5 YEARS.
STATIC MARGIN FOR VALVE FACTOR DEGRADATION (SEPARATE.AND DISTINCT FROM OTHER UNCERTAINTIES)
FOR RISING-STEM MOVs INITIALLY SET-AT 25% WITH SAMPLE-DYNAMIC TESTING TO JUSTIFY AT NEXT REFUELING OUTAGE.
STATIC MARGIN FOR AGE-RELATED DEGRADATION FOR QUARTER-TURN MOVs TO BE DETERMINED BASED ON SAMPLE: DYNAMIC TESTING AT NEXT REFUELING OUTAGE";.
DYNAMIC TESTING PERFORMED IF STATIC MARGIN FALLS-BELOW ESTABLISHED CRITERIA.
PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING OF GATE VALVES:
. LICENSEE PERFORMED INITIAL EVALUATION OF ALL SAFETY-RELATED MOTOR-OPERATED GATE VALVES.
ADDITIONAL EVALUATION WILL BE NECESSARY.
CALLAWAY GL 89-10 PROGRAM
{CONTINUED)
NRC LETTER NOTIFYING LICENSEE OF CLOSURE OF STAFF REVIEW OF CALLAWAY GL 89-10 PROGRAM *FORWARDED ON*
JUNE 8, 1994.
LETTER INDICATES LICENSEE'S PLANS TO CONDUCT THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES TO ENSURE THAT ASSUMPTIONS USED..-
IN VERIFYING GL 89-10 MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITIES-REMAIN VALID:
- 1.
EVALUATE JUSTIFICATION FOR DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY OF 18 MOVs AS ADDITIONAL INDUSTRY INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE.
- 2.
CONTINUE TO ASSESS USE OF LINEAR EXTRAPOLATION OF MOV PERFORMANCE DATA.
- 3.
CONTINUE TO EVALUATE PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING OF GATE VALVES.
- 4.
PERFORM PERIODIC MOV PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION BY DYNAMIC TESTING GATE AND GLOBE MOVs WHEN MARGIN IS LESS THAN 25 PERCENT AFTER REQUIRED THRUST-ADJUSTED* FOR UNCERTAINTIES. - FOLLOWING NEXT REFUELING OUTAGE, PROVIDE STAFF WITH DYNAMIC TEST-BASED INFORMATION CONFIRMING 25% STATIC MARGIN FOR GATE AND GLOBE VALVES AND ESTABLISHING MARGIN FOR AGE-RELATED DEGRADATION FOR BUTTERFLY VALVES.
FORT CALHOUN GENERIC LETTER 89-10 PROGRAM GL 89-10 PROGRAM SCOPE:
29 MOVs DYNAMICALLY TESTED:
20 MOVs DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY OFMOVs-NOT.DYNAMICALLY TESTED BASED ON GROUPING WITH OTHER TESTED MOVs Ar-FORT CALHOUN AND OTHER SOURCES.
PERIODIC VERIFICATION:
INSPECTION REPORT 94-05 STATES THAT LICENSEE'~~-'
PLAN FOR PERIODIC VERIFICATION INCLUDES DYNAMlt=-
TESTING.
PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING OF GATE.VALV~:
LICENSEE EVALUATED GL.89-10 MOVs AND FOUND NONE:.
SUSCEPTIBLE TO PRESSURE-LOCKING.
ADDITIONAL EVALUATION WILL BE NECESSARY.
LICENSEE PREPARING SUBMITTAL TO SUPPORT-CLOSURE-OF:*
STAFF REVIEW OF FORT CALHOUN GL 89-10 PROGRAM
WATERFORD GENERIC LETTER 89-10 PROGRAM GL 89-10 PROGRAM SCOPE:
56 MOVs DYNAMICALLY TESTED:
44 MOVs DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY OF MOVs NOT DYNAMICALLY TESTED BASED ON GROUPING WITH OTHER TESTED MOVs AT.
WATERFORD AND OTHER SOURCES.
PERIODIC VERIFICATION:
MOVs STATIC TESTED USING DIAGNOSTICS EVERY 5 YEARS.
STATIC MARGIN FOR VALVE FACTOR DEGRADATION (SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM OTHER UNCERTAINTIES)
FOR GATE MOVs INITIALLY SET AT 25% WITH SAMPLE:..
DYNAMIC TESTING TO JUSTIFY AT NEXT REFUELING OUTAGE.
DYNAMIC TESTING PERFORMED IF STATIC MARGIN FALLS BELOW ESTABLISHED CRITERIA.
LICENSEE PREPARING RESPONSE~ TO CLOSE-OUT INSPECTION REPORT ON PERIODIC VERIFICATION (INCLUDING GLOBE AND BUTTERFLY VALVES) AND POST:.
MAINTENANCE TESTING.
PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING OF GATE VALVES:
LICENSEE DETERMINED THAT 8 GATE VALVES WERE POTENTIAL SUSCEPTIBLE TO PRESSURE LOCKING AND EVALUATED THEIR CAPABILITY TO OVERCOME THIS CONDITION.
STAFF DID NOT REVIEW CALCULATIONS FOR TECHNICAL MERIT.
LICENSEE PERFORMED PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF THERMAL BINDING.
ADDITIONAL EVALUATION WILL BE NECESSARY.
.e PERIODIC VERIFICATION OF MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY FOR GL 89-10 CLOSURE, LICENSEES ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE~
A LONG-TERM PLAN FOR PERIODIC VERIFICATION THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT DEGRADATION OF MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY WILL BE IDENTIFIED.
LICENSEES MAY USE PRA CONSIDERATIONS TO PRIORITIZE MOVs IN ESTABLISHING PERIODIC VERIFICATION FREQUENCY.
LICENSEES MUST HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT SAFETY-RELATED:.
MOVs WILL REMAIN OPERABLE UNTIL NEXT SCHEDULED DESIGN-BASIS VERIFICATION TEST.
NRC STAFF IS WORKING WITH THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE OF THE ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE TO DEVELOP ACCEPTABLE METHODS-TO VERIFY MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY THROUGH PERIODIC TESTING.
EXAMPLES OF ACCEPTED PERIODIC VERIFICATION PLANS FOR~~
GL 89-10 CLOSURE ARE Cl) DYNAMIC-DIAGNOSTIC TESTING~
OR (2) STATIC DIAGNOSTIC TESTING WITH MARGIN BASED ON PLANT-SPECIFIC DYNAMIC TESTING.
AFTER CLOSURE OF THE STAFF'S REVIEW OF GL 89-10 PROGRAMS, LICENSEES MAY ADJUST THEIR COMMITMENTS-TO PERIODIC VERIFICATION OF MOV DESIGN-BASIS CAPABILITY WITH ADEQUATE JUSTIFICATION.
1989-93 Region 2 MOV Reportable Events Year
- Total 1993
.1992 1111991 111990 CJ 1989 UJ
+-'
C:
Q) >
w Motor Operator Failures 12
. 989 ------------------------------------------
2*
R~~iPn 2 ~jc~n~~~~ RY Unii 17 Units h~d no repqrt~pl~ f~H~r~s qµrina 1hi~ Prri~q I '
I
1989-93 National MOV ReportaPle l=vents 30 25 20 10 5
Motor Operator Failures o==========
1989 1990 1991 1992 Year I
ta.ill Regi~H1 2
- R~afon~ 1,~,4,5
' i I I
- I I
I 1993
1989-94 Region 2 MOV Reportable Events ffiillilll Tot a I
.1994
- Motor Design, Const, fab, or Installation Errors
- '90 10
'91 1993 11111992 111991
.1990 f+/-J 1989 a*
-........ ~ 92...................
2*
R'1~;An ¥ ~iFf1n~ri~~ RY 4nif 22 !Jnits h~~ nq reppflf!l>I!=! fmmtfi; QYIUj lhi5r p~riflf1
'93
'94
1 989-94 National MOV Reportable Events
- Motor Design, Const, Fab or Installation Failures 25
- 20.
en 15
- C CJ)
&j 10.*
5*
oi,:___ _
____L:.___ _
_.£.... _ _
_.L_ _ _
__.L_ _ _
~----J 1989 1990.
1991 1992 1993 1994 Y~ar Im Region 2
- R~gfon.s 1,3,4,5 I
e
1989-94 Region 2 MOV ReportaPle Events II Total
.1994
.1993
.1992 II 1991 II 1990 II 1989 Valve Failures Due to Design, Fab, or Installation errors 7 µnits had flO reported vaJy~ failLff~S qµrina tt,i~ p.~rijp9 en 4
1989-94 National MOV ReportaPle Events Valve* Failures due to Design, Const, F~b or lnstallqtion Errors 100
- 80.
en 60.
C:
(I)
~ 40.
'f I,*
0 "-------L-----'----~---'-------L-----..J 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 fill Region 2
- Regions 1,3,4,5
(.
1 989-94 National MOV Reportab,e Event~
250 200.
- 50.
Valve Failures Requiring Repair lllllllllliiill*....... -~--.............. ~--._----~-
0"-----"---~-----"---~-~
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 y~qr 11J ~~gion 2
- Regions 1,3,4,5