ML19306E504
| ML19306E504 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1984 |
| From: | Miner S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TAC-42507, NUDOCS 8705220473 | |
| Download: ML19306E504 (13) | |
Text
_
=..
o*#
UNITED STATES 8'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
y, t
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20554 t
[
March 23,1984 y....+j Docket No. 50-312 1
MEMORANDUM FOR: John F. Stolz, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch #4, DL-FROM:
Sydney Miner, Project Manager, Operating Reactors Branch #4, DL
SUBJECT:
FORTHCOMING MEETING WITH SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT REGARDING EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW'-
RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Time & Date:
Wednesday, May 16, 1984 9:00am-5:00pm Location:
Phillips Building, P-110 Bethesda, Maryland
Purpose:
To discuss and resolve all outstanding equipment environmental qualification issues for the Rancho Seco Plant.
Requested 1
Participants:
NRC-SMiner, JStolz, VNoonan, PShemanski, RKarsh.
Licensee-RDietrich, et al.
I&E-JTaylor, NLee, GCwalina Region V-TBishop, RDodds, JBurdoin
~
%^
,O S'ydneyMiner)ProjectManager V
Operating Reactors Branch #4, DL cc: See next page l
9 j'
e e
o dh lb (NY' j
g ~ A 9 -o S9
%.=f, y J
w A ? f /-.
o /2./C. i>' V Saxc. $$yEELCR NRR /A95.
(Avl Jbt m $ rl f F l b9-f-[ 9E f 698 Huda >-
Ga 2y A'xx/ vtj4: 9B
) f)A 5 lcy-
. I-.S RC cDa lpws TE To m Le
. yz ljsa n e Whce erancesso nyen cap.
$s&E(LT ReeHLC/-
.$ n) lag A%CM 8/CCC.
5m3 fat (Chu SAM S11uD Sos sa va kubs/
/61RGN AER DL/04Q J.A s A> d.1 p (q e 2 e o r t /f.; sj3 Es
EQUIPMENT 0UALIFICATION AGENDA l
l I.
INTRODUCTION II.-
CURRENT STATUS l
III.
IE NOTICES / CIRCULARS / BULLETINS
]
IV.
EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION (ACCIDENTS) 10CFR50.49 METHODOLOGY:
V.
MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS 1
VI.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION-METHODOLOGY TO RESOLVE TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT ITEMS j
VII.
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR CONTINUED OPERATION VIII.
REVIEW TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
CURRENT STATUS -
2,7 MILLION DOLLARS SPENT TO DATE ON EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATICN.-
MAJOR SCHEDULE PROBLEMS 1.
FT-20001 - LONG-TERM BORON PRECIPITATION FLOW. INSTRUMENT.
CANNOT LOCATE A QUALIFIED TESTED REPLACEMENT, REVIEWING OTHER OPTIONS, 2.
H8DA529B - MAKE-UP PUMP ROOM COOLER TRANSFER SWITCH, H8DSFV23508 - MAKE-UP TANK ISOLATION VALVE TRANSFER SWITCH.
25 BIDS SENT GUT; 23 REJECTIONS; BID OPENING 5/29/84, 3.
A529A THROUGH A529E - EMERGENCY PUMP ROOM COOLER MOTOR (5HP),
25 BIDS SENT OUT; ONLY 2 INDICATED AN INTEREST; ONE QUOTE INFORMALLY AT $200,000 + THE COST OF THE MOTORS ($50,000)s BID OPENING 5/17/84, WILL HAVE A CLEAR PICTURE ON THESE ITEMS BY JULY 1, 1984.
ALL OTHER REQUIRED EQUIPMENT WILL BE QUALIFIED, DOCUMENTATION IN FILES, AND AN OPERATING MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IN PLACE BY CYCLE 7-START-UP (JANUARY 10, 1985).
4
10CFR50.49 B1 EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION
, CHAPTER 14 FSAR ACCIDENTS TO DETERMINE EQUIPMENT REQUIRED TO MITIGATE AN ACCIDENT AND MONITOR STATUS.
. ACCIDENTS INCLUDED IN REVIEW:
UNCOMPENSATED OPERATING REACTIVITY CHANGES START-UP ACCIDENT ROD WITHDRAWAL ACCIDENT MODERATION DILUTION ACCIDENT COLD WATER ACCIDENT LOCA MSLB STUCK R0D LOSS OF 0FFSITE POWER HELB ANALYSIS INSIDE/0UTSIDE CONTAINMENT
, CONSIDERED:
FLOODING PIPE WHIP IMPINGEMENT TEMPERATURE
. LOOKED AT:
MAIN STEAM MAIN FEEDWATER LETDOWN HPI OTHER HIGH ENERGY LINES
i 10CFR50,49 (B)(2)
EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION METHODOLOGY
. 10CFR50.49 (B)(2) REQUIRES THE QUALIFICATION.0F "NON-SAFETY RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT WHOSE FAILURE UNDER POSTULATED EN-VIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS COULD PREVENT SATISFACTORY ACCOMPLISHMENT OF SAFETY FUNCTIONS..."
l 1
. THE ORIGINAL METHODOLOGY THE DISTRICT USED TO IDENTIFY ALL SAFETY RELATED EQUIPMENT IN A HARSH ENVIRONMENT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN OUR IE BULLETIN 79-01B RESPONSE, WAS SUCH THAT 10CFR50.49 CATEGORIES (B)(1) AND (B)(2) WERE ENCOMPASSED.
. THE DISTRICT HAS PERFORMED A SECOND INVESTIGATION UTILIZING A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT METHODOLOGY TO ASSURE THAT ALL 10CFR50.49 PARAGRAPH (B)(2) COMPONENTS HAVE BEEN INCLUDED ON OUR LISTS.
THE FOLLOWING IS A DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY.
1.
A LIST OF ALL ELECTRIC OPERATED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE CLASS I BOUNDARIES WAS GENERATED USING BOTH THE PIPING -
J LINE DESIGNATION TABLES AND PLANT PIPING'AND INSTRUMENTATION DIAGRAMS.
2.
THE ONE-LINE AND ELEMENTARY DIAGRAMS FOR EACH PIECE OF EQUIPMENT FOR STEP 1 WERE IDENTIFIED AND REVIEWED AND ALL ELECiRICAL POWER SUPPLIES WERE IDENTIFIED.
I 7,
v---
__g e-
3.
A STEP-BY-STEP REVIEW 0F THE EMERGENCY PROCEDURES WAS
~
COND!lCTED TO IDENTIFY INSTRUMENTATTON AND EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR OPERATORS TO ACCOMPLISH REQUIRED SAFETY FUNCTIONS.
4.
ALL CLASS I ELEMENTARIES WERE REVIEWED'TO IDENTIFY ANY NON-SAFETY RELATED COMPONENTS.
A CHECK WAS PERFORMED TO ASSURE ALL ELEMENTARIES FROM STEP 2 WERE INCLUDED.
IF FAILURE OF THE NON-SAFETY RELATED COMPONENTS COULD P0SSIBLY PREVENT THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF A SAFETY FUNCTION, THEY WERE LISTED.
5.
A REVIEW 0F ALL COMPLETED MODIFICATIONS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO ASSURE STEPS 1, 2, 3, AND 4 INCLUDE NEW EQUIPMENT.
)
i 6.
THE LIST FROM STEP 4 AND 5 WAS SUBJECTED TO A HARSH EN-VIRONMENT EVALUATION.
IF LOCATED IN A HARSH ENVIRONMENT THE QUALIFICATION WAS REVIEWED OR A SCHEDULE FOR RESOLUTION J
PROPOSED AND A JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUED OPERATION PRE-PARED.
. THE ONLY NON-SAFETY RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT LOCATED IN A HARSH ENVIRONMENT WHOSE FAILURE UNDER POSTULATED _ ENVIRONMENTAL k \\d CONDITIONS COULD PREVENT SATISFACTORY ACCOMPLISHMENT OF SAFETY-6 5 UNCTIONS, IDENTIFIED WAS A GAS RADIATION MONITOR (R-15006) AND TWO LIMIT SWITCHES HV-26513 AND HV-26514).
. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR CONTINUED OPERATION ARE INCLUDED FOR THIS EQUIPMENT.
=
10CFR50.49 B (3)
EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION
. THIS ITEM WILL BE DISCUSSED IN THE DISTRICT'S JULY 15, 1984 I
REGULATORY GUIDE 1.97 SUBMITTAL TO THE NRC.
DETAILS WILL BE PROVIDED IN A JUNE OF 1984, MEETING WITH THE NRC STAFF.
. CLOSE COORDINATION EXISTS BETWEEN THE REGULATOR GUIDE 1.97 TASK GROUP AND EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION TASK GROUP.
I q
MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
. NUCLEAR ENGINEERING REVIEW ALL QUALIFICATION DATA AND DETERMINES MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION AND NORMAL MAINTENANCE.
. INFORMATION DOCUMENTED ON A MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE l
. MARS SHEETS ADDRESS
, LIFE OF EQUIPMENT / PARTS
, REPLACEMENT INTERVAL j
. TYPES OF LUBRICANT BY MANUFACTURER NAME
. PERIODIC OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
. MARS SHEETS AND SCEW SHEETS ARE SUBMITTED TO NUCLEAR OPERATIONS FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.
. COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE PROGRAM EXISTS AND WILL BE IMPROVED TO AUTOMATICALLY INDICATE NECESSARY ACTIONS.
. A COMPUTERIZED MASTER EQUIPMENT LIST EXISTS FOR ALL PLANT EQUIPMENT.
THIS LIST WILL INDICATE ALL EQUIPMENT THAT REQUIRE SPECIAL MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
. LIST WILL BE USED TO INSURE UNPLANNED MAINTENANCE IS DONE IN A CORRECT MANNER.
. UNPLANNED MAINTENANCE IS CONTROLLED BY A WORK REQUEST.
ALL WORK PERFORMED PUT BACK INTO COMPUTER BY PLAN ID' NUMBER.
. WILL REVIEW EXISTING SYSTEM AND MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO INSURE QUALIFIED EQUIPMENT IS MAINTAINED. QUALIFIED FINAL SYSTEM WILL CONSIDER:
. VENDOR INTERFACE / UPDATE
, SPARE / REBUILT PARTS
. GENERIC LETTER 83-28 1l
. COMPLETE SYSTEM IN SERVICE AND OPERATIONAL BY 3/85, i
7 t
i ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION METHODOLOGY TO TO RESOLVE TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT ITEMS I
EACH PIECE OF EQUIPMENT WAS:~
PHYSICALLY INSPECTED INSTALLATION DOCUMENTED WITH PICTURES AND WRITING MODEL NUMBER / EQUIPMENT TYPE OBTAINED.
q SPECIFIC DATA OBTAINED ON EQUIPMENT COMPARISON BETWEEN PAPER AND WALKDOWN DATA.
WALKDOWN DATA USED AS BASIS FOR WHAT WE HAVE.
TEST REPORTS OBTAINED FOR EQUIPMENT, TEST REPORT REVIEW AGAINST FIELD WALKDOWN DATA TO INSURE. ITEM TESTED WAS SIMILAR TO INSTALLED ITEM.
TEST REPORT REVIEWED TO DOR /NUREG 0588/IEEE 323-1974 AS.
APPLICABLE.
REVIEW EACH DEFICIENCY IN TECHANICAL EVALUATION REPORT AND-RESOLVE EACH PROBLEM WITH DOCUMENTATION IN FILE.
RESOLVE EACH NOTE IN TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT AND RESOLVE 3
EACH NOTE WITH DOCUMENTATION IN FILE.
i a
n-n,.,,lne,.-,
---m..
n.,
w-
- o.
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR CONTINUED OPERATION (JCO)
]
1.
.JCO'S ATTACHED TO OUR SUBMITTAL ARE NEW, j
i 1
1 2.
JC0'S IN JULY 20, 1983, LETTER, STATUS REPORT, 3.
JCO'S IN JANUARY, 1981 SUBMITTAL, i
ONE OF THE ABOVE COVER EVERY ITEM IN THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT NOT QUALIFIED, REPORT INDICATES WHICH ONE.
1 i
PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE PROFILES FOR PIPE BREAKS OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT The following information is required for each pipe break analysis perforrrad by the applicants.
s 1.
With respect to the pipe to be broken, we need to know the:
a.
Type of fluid (water or steam);
b.
Temperature; c.
Pressure; d.
Source of the fluid; e.
Flow rate (or assumed flow rate) versus time; and f.
Enthalpy versus time 2.
With respect to the compartments being analyzed:
a.
Number of compartment analyzed; b.
For each compartment:
1.
initial temperature ii.
initial pressure iii.
initial humidity iv.
floor area including floor space taken by equipment (square feet) v.
nun'.ber of vents and vent areas (square feet) for each vent; and
~
vi.
compartment wall height (feet) and c.
Simple compartment and interconnection diagram.
3.
All assumptions used, including but not limited to the:
a.
Orifice coefficient; b.
Fluid expansion factor; and c.
Heat transfer coefficient for heat through the walls 4.
Utilities analysis results:
a.
Temperature versus time curve (peak temperature specified);
b.
Pressure versus time curve (peak pressure specified); and c.
Humidity U "-"s time curve (peak humidity specified) a?
S 40 h
pt h
9 y
- /
y /
',( ae
+
Y t s2^ ( d,/
/
.-