ML19290C066
| ML19290C066 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/23/1979 |
| From: | Butcher E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Lainas G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-24, REF-GTECI-EL, TASK-A-24, TASK-OR IEB-79-01, IEB-79-1, NUDOCS 8001090114 | |
| Download: ML19290C066 (3) | |
Text
9 b 2 & V, (
h.f/h0M#
6 en b-UNITED STATES k'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y,{
8 3,,
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
~**.$,.*
RUG 2 31919 1-p ;7 c'l cL b b
G. Lainas, Chief, Plant Systems Branch,' 'D0'Ri NOTE T0:
D. Tondi, Section, Leader, Plant Systems Branch, D0R THRU:
FROM:
E. Butcher, Plant Systems Branch, D0R NRC STAFF GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION
SUBJECT:
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN OPERATING REACTORS Bill Morris, Dan Mcdonald and Iqvself met with On August 20 and 21,1979, representatives of the Consumers Power Company (Bill Beckeus et. al.) at The purpose of the meeting was to obtain their offices in Jackson, Michigan.
clarification of information submitted by the licensee in connection with the SEP concerning environmental qualification of electrical equipment, and gain insights into the application of a draft set of guidelines the staff is preparing for use in evaluating licensee responses to IE Bulletin 79-01.
Highlights and conclusions from the meeting are as follows:
Completeness Review - It will be necessary to provide guidelines for 1.
assassing the completeness of the list of equipment the licensee has As a minimum a list of systems whose equipment identified as Class IE.
The list should be broken down must be qualified should be provided.
into time required categories, i.e., short tenn (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />) and long term (30 - 100 days).
Materials Aging - The current staff proposal to establish a list identifying 2.
materials known to exhibit significant thermal and radiation aging and use the list to identify components for which a qualified life must It will be difficult be established appears to be a workable approach.
in some cases to identify component materials but as a whole the task can be This appears accomplished with a reasonable effort by the licensees.
to be a reasonable and practical alternative to an across-the-board requirement to establish a qualified life for all equipment.
Installation Interfaces - The judgement as to whether qualification testing is representative of the actual service and installation conditions requires 3
i Such things an in-the-field inspection of the component installation.
)
as mounting orientation, electrical connections, and seals should be f
It may be acceptable to only compared to actual test conditions.
inspect a sampling of installations for different classes of equipment (e.g., valves, transmitters).
This will require access to containment.
1730 327 8001090 Id
,, 4.-. _
...~~:_
e.
Review of Test Results - Actual test results should be reviewed to 4.
verify that the licensees interpretation of anomolies and test failures is acceptable. F.guipment h= ia +ha nast been declared qualified even tbnugh it did not remain functional for the entire test.
Systems Type Review - The qualification of some. equipment will require 5.
consideration of systems type questions such as' component function and time required to function. These questions are difficult to answer and are very pl. ant specific. In general, equipment of this nature will have to be referred back to DDR for review.
Qualification For Flooding - It appears that a significant amount of equip-6.
ment may become flooded in the event of a LOCA and its original qualification testing did not include flooding.
In many such cases a test with satuated steam was performed.
In those cases where the flooding of the equipment was identified and accepted as part of the ECCS Appendix K reviews, no additional testing for flooding should be required if the original test included saturated steam. If the equipment was not reviewed in connection with Appendix K it should be referred back to D0R for resolution.
Equipment Outside Containment - The previous staff evaluation of high energy 7.
line breaks outside containment is an important part of the guidelines basis for not requiring a detailed review of equipment qualification Therefore, the reviewer should verify that the staff evaluation in these areas.
of high energy line breaks is complete before completing the qualification revi ew.
Radiation Service Conditions _ - The proposed staff plan to include simplified 8.
nomograms for considering the effects of time, shielding, etc., in the guidelines appears to be of value and a practicable approach.
Test Duration - Type tests have in the past only been run for a relatively 9.
short period of time (as short as 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />) even for equipment required to function in the long term. Guidelines for acceptable test durations should be included in the guidelines.
h E. Butcher Plant Systems Branch Division of Operating Reactors cc: See page 3 1730 328 w e.l.~
.a w =
. w p m ; _..
. cc:
D. Eisenhut B. K. Grimes telDy li A. 5ZUKleW1CZ 4'
D. Mcdonald W. Morris S. Block T. Quay E. Jordan V. Thomas J. Knight (SEP)
D. Crutchfield 1730 329 i
f 0