ML20004C132

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Environ Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment,Ie Bulletin 79-01B, Technical Evaluation Rept
ML20004C132
Person / Time
Site: Prairie Island  Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/17/1980
From: Jablonski F
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20004C127 List:
References
IEB-79-01B, IEB-79-1B, NUDOCS 8106010590
Download: ML20004C132 (17)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF SAFETY-RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IEB 79-01B l TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT DOCKET NO. 50-306 DATED: November 17, 1980 Licensee: Northern States Power Co. Type Reactor: W PWR Plant: rrairie Island Unit 2 Prepared by F. J. Jablonski Engineering Support Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch, RIII l l 8106 010 59a

CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Background and Discussion 1 Summary of Licensee Actions / Statements 'l System Comparison 2 Equipment Evaluation 2-4-8 Caveat 2 Conclusion 2 Attachments: 1. Referenced Test Reports 2. Onsite Inspection Report 3a. Generic Issues 3b. Site Specific Issues 4. Licensee System List 5. NRR's System List 6. Category Criteria 7. LER's 8. Unresolved Generic - Specific Issues 9. Concurrence Code -v-

Introduction This report is submitted in accordance with TI 2515/411I for use as input to the Safety Evaluation Report on qualification of Class IE electrical equipment instelled in potentially " harsh" environmental areas at this facility. Background and Discussion IE Bulletin No. 79-012/ required tne licensee to perform a detailed review of the environmental qualification of Class IE equipment to ensure that the equip-ment would function under (i.e. during and following) postulated accident cotJitions. The Technical Evaluation Feport (TER) is based on IE's review of the licensee's submittal for conformance with the DOR guildelines or NUREG-0588, a site inspec-tion of selected system components, to EQB'sreviewofcomponenttestreports.prifyaccuracyofthesubmittal,and Licensee submittals were received on March 13, 1980, May 12, 1980, May 23, 1980, July 10, 1980 and October 31, 1980.

pecific guidance was reytested from IE/NRR headquarters. f Generic a The site inspection was completed on September 26, 1980.

Summary of Licensee Actions / Statements Based upon evaluation of Class IE equipment, licensee believes he has complied with the requirements of Bulletin 79-01B. Licensee believes that with the completion of the action items noted, there will exist no outstanding items which would preclude the continued safe operation of Prairie Island Ur.it 2. Repiscement of solenoid valves, limit switches and other instruments is being accomplished as material is received and scheduled for installation during the next outage. Present schedules call for Unit 2 to be shutdown in February 1981. All modifications will be completed by June 1982. 1/ Technical Zvaluation Report (TER) On Results Of Staff Actions Taken To Verify Reactor Licensee Response To IEB 79-01B And Supplemental Info rmation. 2/ Environmental Qualification of Class 1E Equipment. 3/ Attachment 1. {/ Attachment 2. S/ Atttchments 3a and 3b. -

System Comparison A comparison was made between the systemyflist provided by the licensee 6/ and a similar list provided to IE by NRR-during a meeting in Bethesda, MD on September 30, 1980. The following systems were not included in the li-censee's submittal. Pressurizer Spray Emergency Power Control Room Habitability Safety Equipment Area Ventilation Equipment Evaluation Class 1Eegypmentwasevaluated,thatis,placedintofiveseparate categories.- Result of the evaluation follows: (See pages following) Caveat Test reports and other documentation which licensees referenced as estab-lishing environmental qualification were reviewed for acceptability by hdR, Environmental Qualification Branch. (Reference Attachment 3a, memorandum dated June 20, 1980 Hayes to Jordan.) This TER does not include information about seismic of fire withstand capability. It should therefore not be inferred that Category I equipment meets all necessary qualification requirements. Conclusion Based on IE's review of the licensee's submittal, the site: inspection, and licensee's proposed actions, it cannot be concluded that there is reasonable i assurance all components installed at the Prairie Island Unit 2 are environ-mentally qualified and installation methods of environmentally qualified l components weald not contribute to the failure of such components during a potential accident. A positive conclusion cannot be made until: l 1. All matters referred to IEHQS/NRR have been satisfied.El l 2. The 4 systems missing from the licensee's submittal have been evaluated by NRR. (Page 2) 3. The negative equipment evaluations have been reviewed by NRR. (Pages 4, 5, 6, and 8.) 6/ Attachment 4. 7/ Attachment 5. 8/ Attachment 6. {/ Attachment 8. i.-

m--W 45 J = + -- d +--&- -2 --T* e e' 32ank i 4 1 i l l l l l l t I i 1 l l

  • e r

qs. e e U Y. w, 3 7, E'? E 7 I 6, 7, } %g a w g e h a4 m .o w m N s h l' ,'s ds 'T s s s >a e i e A i t o 1 4 s< m o o o o o M h o o .s a ? 5 g o n K D-i S 4 7-S 4 4 d 4 s s w MJ e

    • g }

P "o A 4 A $ ]e ]: 5 4 i g "g

==C 4 I ~ .Z a i,s, a-tw-a n,,n, n, e,w, e,n, 3 n 3 ee c.m et et -c4 e ev et ss i et t es 1 M R 8 O S o o o o l I o W G o a R R R a R e ~ s O s. .s a s. m. x s t-s s s s s P n is. -n s s es n (s f f c:a u w 4 3 0 o u w o o o a O %n 9 4 N o q o o N N o G 0 w o w m m m m m m 'M M N ~ M g Q 4 g q l 5 { 1 2 U' d 2 1 A E n i i s t o-s 3 '4 t i N~ N 4 i s x s a w w w o w + o o g 4 Q j M s m M ss m { w 5 k k b b $ / / / / / 4 8

d !3 g S h gl br bild

-r e i m s a n n e u a ga i El d ans f ix n t I h h o O O D 0 I 'E k>e$ % I ! f k I w w w e a i e = e I e o : i g w e e A L ? ? o s a o A A o E d d i O i. d 5 4 4 3 e m >e.'o t e e ! w, ~ n, 4 v w 3 g b g. s s s s y s i, y u ~ s y y g u 4 k } h e' = g L i 4 4 4 d @i. a. o b 1 l "I; 1 1 N s s s s s d s I s .S s! $ d 4 $ *. i w s o S 2 a 1-3*.; g-q z q' \\ l h $ k Y H k k tb b 'N ~ - .e .----- - ---------a- _,-o--e ,,,m--_-.-w ewe--m-+ w-,w.-

k )W 3 'O ai W 3 g g b g e E i o n e 3 4 'l i! 1 A '4 4 4 '4 A 4 S A 3 l 4 m m nl m l o e R +a w ~s n o x t w s s s s ss ul A t t u 1 w t t s l T .I o i I g l 4 s g l 4 E x 4 y Q q x l 3 S g g g ~ w n x i l g 3 1 c. a i i a = l = s e e s s d'4 c4

  1. 1
  2. 2 -y h 3) i t c4 e 1 eg

{ SS 'D o me to o l % S l 1 'G % g 74 -if si p1 ci l S s i d l etv 4 es tei h M ?$ 5 I E I 0 l 8 I l etl - n ,~ b b D b M S N N h g l% 1 5 5 A d I I s i D 1 $ 'l< o s o t X R R i 8 l M M N l ,8 4 l" m m m m m m a s 4 l L A 1 2 m n t' V l y c v W e A. ( 3 3 3 o E l l I Q o s s m a 4 o u x i,. s. w w w g x g I 3 6 L L L 3 8 4 8 8 4 4 I 4 4 u t x s v U. I jo d i e f i Sl 5 = t 4 gu s 2 8 94 a a p N l st % P n i p ol = 4 4 $U t* D 1 4 i h 4R 3R 6 M c a 43 t i 8 2 2 5 U m e o x ? 8 5 4 a E s a 1,. 1 { l 5 n 6 s 1 + o-I 5 w = o a 2 9 s s 4 d k l A E w V o t-8 1 's s v o y 0 o E f J h 4 -j$ a} j l U E 't o o o e T l d j t! 4 4 4 d d D $ i. l + x $ b i k c o i .c s s $s $, *. S [ E h 5 ! $ ~i s a ~ o 5 6 c g a x 4

T p

5 s e a u a 1 l a e o e s y H H H H a W la H is,i h, h - Ya.- _l . _. l..

-a I 4 T q' %. S k 1' N v V D k %o ) g 3 i \\> s u-y H g g y g ( ? cro 4' gs g' i $wi m E A N X % 4 4 'A @ A 1 Y,i a t 4 s n x v s s 4 N' V Y Y 4' Q 2 4 Y 4' N +

O o

s' + s' ..s q A 4. A A i i S k h. L U 4 A 1 ~ x g o o o o n 4 g n t o c w {! h b 4 4 g 4 D 4 y d s g = =

  • t

-s ws = w = g k g N w e 4 4 4 4 4 5 a a 4

  • 4 9

x { O ~j M O d h 8 6 0 O n re i c4 S t et et es et i i ev E k k k k k $N ~. s s ~ ~ r n s s s s s s s. w Y S S S 4 4 7 s I D N A N r-R R R 9 R N k C ~. g A h h h k k A b h Q Q 't N .. e ~. s o m) E Y h D N 2% i i d i @* M 4 N 4 's! 5 k (% ( 4 %$ )f ( m (i g i % M 3 G 5 4 2 w w % bF w x x x x x x x L A s k L. N s o 2 d 2 s d d k g g g d t w w N G V o o o i4' Y t E ] me i co n w u f ! $# d '? 23 O,, SL E E d I t OD 'I t 7 $$ D t a Sa !N ka n es s 24 z # d ak d d ha N Ns t o o o o o je o a D o .i o ( o g o e s g (! k 5 k k k h k k N 4 6 co 0 f f 4 q Q s i i l = I I d Y o W 4 P i' f 'P 3 4 ? 6 b $ P ? a t 7 m w* i 7 4 4 4 7 s v 3 at i e E t g g g t o N Q 3 -J 4 4 3 y s3 4 Q Q 31 4 i i e k S y 4 i 3 s s s s 3 s s 4 x 4 ~a = a y a o q q %a m 2 o ~ Q p y E E I U 5 l 5 4 E E p <u d 4 4 d e a d a o a .a a H H H (-{ H H H H H h y lj= nlg d 'S' a s. U U L Ul]l,)

i i 1 i .!N l CAT bHCRIPTION ManuentroMR ne6/rpre NeTN Loc et iner Tfort M4'sE M 3Ptn1 gnD Aging ATT1 RUa WCut ? f,f % 11g Alo V liini / orp e CNT S cldy s 32 S /04 7 /00 gl,.rsyri) yo ys I,.7, V /VD-f3, C Sn18-o o Fuse Yolder Bussnum \\_ llEB-A AUX S/hs 14 9 /t/. 7 <.snl Voyr .rg ig }Ies-4 _la 12 0 j i y,,, l.a Le 0,1 Mohol pre-Mvvern Aux f,,l, pgo" Ng? .py iVo-Z rt ggy Ng? N42 ta Gre se cheveam ser-a cj7 in sso N2? We? Ne ?. ano' ye? .rs 7 74 s's - Z^/ H flooci 40fy' HjCos

y

,y %>\\sce K,f OKon s } e (,oy-99-tsrl 3 ' IYS

  1. I

I# # car M.0// 2tro' '/OY' 39 3/ Alo -E N Q Cale, Paw e,- o c~, I e "**c' j uis ' voir x 4-No '!";/,' 3m, m in, ,n u,a y Ca ue, P-Je.,+ Ke 4e nra ee <->i1..s O<-i s 80s Ia n, wo, yg y, ,, 3 3, 3 y y,.g,(g car 3 tvxs 32 o %.7 foo g,y i 0dle' ros+ Br sV '-> flo o d ! " Y 'Y"* V ! k B's i Ia. in g cNT had a 31L /0tl. 7 l00 g,og y/o

yoy, gg go.gy cn f),

Molor Elec Maci, tryc p py, Ne? N2? sye? trio' qq, y g. Tb n flow xmfr Foxioro E'3ff, 'll % gux a v Ars 3w y y., iso 14 iVo -E /4Bo * \\ Thigo enel ed nan D. G. db y, er. VNA-ito(Hve) f" yg />rs 2 70 ff,7 /80 ,fst/ Ifio' s 3739,32 Ala -M f 3 l rs,,, Pen e fnlie' O.c.06nen s/"p'-t'6's to dta 2,0 44 7 too Yll uis ' 3733, 39 Ms-ne s "',1,f sw.'" sus n Me s r), isis Pc,,e w 4 - D. G.o%e n $i 6-H") 'f,. usi,,s .no av iso g g-gn . EL s Lin,4-Sw. NilM co EAI80 (',j*, rYo i 3E0j MIN

NT 3 o cligg 3qo 24.7 to o

,g, t/c y, 5, (o $s.g y, r h

  1. Ami Pr c. n-i e 'E sic - a n J

/a3e y,p 7 P00 n,,

xi [ N s N kkk a~t 3 v ? ? ? y y e ? ? o

e. w xx w

r v w a l e, =4 bl 6 m l l e l ? ? E l m; 4 U l l l I 1 k k w -2 = l a l i l ~ ~ n e kn sw a ev et u% I l l i } l I 9 tw d d l l l I l "w I l ~- s s s s s s s l 4 l l l l 5 W 2 4 n ~ t t r N i f h l 1 k l l i l ~ m m n m a w n

c.. W %.Q n

l S y h ? T] 2s k i 1 f. ) 3 N i l l l e x t 3 ea s ( ) o e o o +* kQ f$s k O N o s s i~ s s s s s s s s x x x s a w t R t M 4 4 l 4 4 R b d 2R w Y b V 0 b b u t; O O v 4 wV h 't' Yb S \\ 0 N "w h tN to, Oo wy - -d +4 n 4 s4 if i s g b S. r3 x t T' o e o o 8 t, t. t. t ( %S ~ I b 5 = no 2 a sa 3 s g T T Y q q [ 9 M 7 I o W W V W W a 4 't o ?' e N o D 0 0 O m g y o v V 3 i V O 3 W h 5 la N D 3 3 3 p 4 ? l a T N E 3 3 c b x 2 t s y a 3 l2 3 5 ico v o x 3 d Q 3 3 3 cf i I 3 Ji ?~ e-t t i h) I 5 ) Ik C3 ^ 3 i t l 3 a J ~! ! O 4 s J E E 2 !? ce ~ ~ e w m e e e m c, ~ E N 1 E S 3 a g 3 Clll3 k p D d k D N N k d.$ ~ ~ .--.-_,,.-4,w,,.- , - - - --y-n-,-- , - -, -.--,.,,,-,.,y,y ,w,,y,,,-,,,-,,,y,,.,. y-7%w- - -.,. -,-,-,.-,aw,-ww...--we,,m-,,,---._.-m., m_.., _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. _

5 N f N h & N & { a$'?i 91~;os;, L j 4 A e i. 3 A =' 3 h Nff d* k,* f S I Y k k h k D e4 1 l od h l i I l I l i I l 1 I o "I 4 lI 0 I I l I i l I I I 3 I i i l 8 l = ai l 4 i l j l I I l t I i i i g + j l i l i I I I 1 I I I i i 3 i l I l I i i I i I l i i ~ s l l l l l l l 1 h k 4 k l l l s E l i I I I i l I i i i i i l i 4 N k R I i l l I I l I l 1 1 11 i s i .s = s % sk 5 k / 4 4 h 4 4 4 4 s 6 E ~ o u e u u a u o u u o m 3 is gQ i t n g = a l_ e 4 la

d e,t '. ~t

+ 4 2 l it u .: Le to t= a Bely p I e 44 M BR Bt 4~ @n-4 s = be fJ P d ad G4 t 2 i x 1 I E x R x x ~ s 9 K B c Y is a 5 g th G ? e o s a s p I E d $ 2 8 2 g5 G S 2 2 2 E 3 5 s .s 4 M 1 o Q o

8 8o i

I ? 4 4 o o u u o =mc t, o s g 1 0 V 4 s E .2 7 a i x s u s. :22 e n s c x e a e sc n o c k 't e Q [f. O LE 't R 2 'R j C.D 1 L L L 3 E 2 7 7 7 :o c n Et d" s 4 D ,A d 4 4. v) O C9 M i 4 s s 3

  • cc:

r;

m

\\g k q< 3 A O g 7 g g g g j g y Qg N G s3 d if J ~2 .3 -G M s3 m O 9 4 '4 M 4 9 3 a x s. g y CL., ~ p< d u 4 b M h b h h kN (M h .g. ~ -.. - ,o.w-,- -- ~-, --, ,,.m -r-,, .-,,-,-,,,-r.--+---we,---,,-+-r,,.r-_- -, + -,,

  • M e&

Ga seelesW & e-- g gguDe N h@m h k k 4 k hl k" I N k' I k I I I E Nl l t S o e l l l I l E, + x; W L k k I U I l l l I I I E S x l l l I '. k l l l I w ~ se es w es I l I l I I 4 l l l I I l l

f N

s N s l l .s S S k f I l s g O D h a M i S! a a l l I I I I I I 1 4 g i w l k a s a w I e t x x s L 4 w w w s k n 3 / 4 4 4 6 / / 4 4 4 6 3 go ) a rv

)

s u d lk'n kI'.]oag E S jf I k [ n[ E 't a e e n d m e e e 3 s e m m e s m t I O _i 5 w 4 E 2 S S E B R kg g l R d Ec r 5 o o e o e

==C 4 o o o o 1 g b 4 Y U 6 v y b U b y b 3 a w s w n 1 e y o e n s + R J 4 { k j b ( 3 3

C::3 N

N

    • k &

Q (n i i s s s t . 4 N o N E sZ m s s s a s x 'il N ~ V 4 4 e a a x a a a g d d d d 4 is s y s W Wl H -n-n~~.- .-+e-~-.r-,, _ ___ _ j

r J 1. WCAP 7L10-L Motorized Valves 2. WCAP 77hh Motorized Valves 3. FIRL F-C3271 Motorized alves L. Li=itorque Project 600456 Motorized Valves 5 ACME Cleveland Test Plan 8-31-77 Limit Switches 6. Letter 5-12-9C T*? PP' Limit Switches 7 WCAP 7829 Fan Motors 8. Joy !4PG l-kil Fan Motors 9 ASCO Test Report AQS 21678/TR-Rev. A Solenoid Valves 10. Honeywell Catalog 50, Page E-2 Limit Switch 11. Engineering Test Lab, Bulletin 6 Li=it Switch 12. Letter 3-25-80 E/M-USP Motor 13 Letter 9-29-80 USC-NSP Motor / Fuse Holder lb. WCAP 85hl Transmitter 15 Magnetrol TR 9306 Transmitter

16. Letter 11-30-79 BSP-3&W

. Accelerometer 17 WCAP 9157 RTD 18. Letter 3/80 NSP-NRC Signal Converter I 19 Letter 3/78 USP-URC Li=it Switch 20. Letter 7/80 USP-NRC Li=it Switch 21. WCAP 875h Motor 22. WCAP Th10-C Trans=itter 23 MIL-STD-202D Fuse Ho:;er 2L. Letter 2-7-80 Mobil Oil-USP Lube Oil 25 Letter 10-30-79 Chevron USA-USP Grease

26. Letter 1-19-77 W -Wis/Minn Pcwer Grease 27 Letter 11-21-78 GE-NSF Epoxy Varnish 28.

Letter 8-T-78 GE-GE Epoxy Varnish 29 GE Insulating Materials Products Data, Epoxy Varnish ThLICA Epoxy Resin and Th010 Epoxy Catalyst; Effect of Radiation on Materials 30. Ckenite Test Procedure Cable 31. Letter 8-31-78 Ckonite-USP Cable

32. WCAP Th10-L Vol. II Cable 33 FIRL F-C2737 Cable 3L.

Kerite FT-LVC-1 Cable 35 3IW 3901 Cable i

36. 3IE 390h Cable 37.

D.G. O'Brien C19QA053 Penetration

38. Letter 6-20-78 Fluor-Pioneer-WPS Penetration 39 D. G. O'Brien ER-192 Penetratica j

LO. LOCA Qualificatien of erite 1000v Splice Kits FR Insulated, FR Jacketed Cables 3-10-80 kl. Qualification Tests cf Electrical Cables Splice Kits Under Simulated Post-Accident Rx Cnt t Service Cond. R-C2737 h-15-70 h2. ACME Cleveland Test Plan 7-2L-78 Li=it Switch L3. Nuclear Radiation and Switch Applications Limit Switch th. FINOP's ECOS Actuation Study Mcv h5 Nu=erous Tests en Various Ins. Mat'l Motor Test Repcrts 3 noens L.*.*.e.

I*lic. a UNif ED ST A T ES $.j,_ g', 5 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION d ',W,, i REGION Ill o,4L g f y 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD g s.,*...f GLEN ELLYN. ILLINotS 60137 Septecher 26, 1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: E. L. Jordan, Assistant Director, Division of Faactor Opere.tions Inspection, IE:HQ

d. Fiorelli, Chief, Reactor Construction and THRU:

Engineering Support Branch FROM: D. W. Hayes, Chief Engineering Support Section 1

SUBJECT:

SCREENING REVIEW OF LICENSEE RESPONSE TO IEB 79-OlB AND

SUMMARY

OF INSPECTION OF INSTALLED SYSTDiS AT PRAIRIE ISLAND 1 AND 2 - DOCKET NOS. 50-382; 50-306 Frank Jablonski has completed the inspection phase at Prairie Island Units 1 and 2 in response to IEB 79-013. A walkdown was conducted on September 17, 1980 to inspect installed components associated with the systems listed on the attachment. Observations: Motor Operated Valves (MOV's) MOV Nos. MV-32132 and MV-32135 were limitorque, type SMB-000 vith Reliance motors, Class "B" insulation; MOV No. MV-32068 was limitorque type SMB-00 with a Reliance motor, Class "HP" insulation. The referenced qualification documentation was Project Number 603456 which qualified y motors with "RH" insulation. MOV No. 32020 was limitorque type SMB-00 with a Reliance motor, Class "B" insulation. Class "B" is suitable outside containment. The referenced qualification documentation was WCAP 7410-L and 7744 which meet or exceed outside containment duty. In all cases the MOV's were installed in accordance with manufacturer's recoe=endations. Both power and control cable were installed in flexible metallic conduit.

  • Below flood level.

Dome Recirculation Fan The fan unit was a Joy Axivane series 1000, Model No. Ol8-1Y-3450, Serial No. SF27974-1, Motor No. 600277-69. The referenced qualification Cnsite Inspectica Repert ATTACE'T!T 2

4 E. L. Jordan Septecher 26, 1980 docu=entation was Joy Manufacturing Report No. X-411; that test report was for Motor No. 600277-69. All requirements appear to have been met. Solenoid Valves All of the solenoids listed on the attachment were scheduled for replace-ment, however, discrepancies existed between solenoids listed on the cocponant evaluation sheets and those cetually installed. For example, scienoid Nos. 33374 and 33377 were listed as RET 832427; type RHT8321A1 installedy Similar discrepancies existed with solenoid Nos. 33440 and 33441 In all cases the installation met manufacturer's recommendations, 1.e., installation in any position was acceptable. Cable was installed. individually or in combination rigid steel / flexible metal conduit. g Ter=inations were made in standard handy boxes, i.e., without gasketed cover; open to atmosphere. (Refer to Terminations, below). Limit Switches Limit Switch Nos. CD-34074 and CD-34078 were NAMCO Model EA-180. Qualification reference document was ACME-Cleveland Test Plan, August 31, 1977. The licensee is considering the installation of hermetic scaling units at the interfaca of the limit switch and flex / rigid conduit. Component evaluatien sheet for switch No. CV-31107, a NAMCO model D2 was not shown to be qualified for aging, operating tice, or pressure {00X, Ins truments Instru=ent Nos.16796* and 23015, containment sump level and cain steam flow respectively, will be replaced. The installed instrument models were Magnetrol A-153FEP/VPXY-TDM and Barton 384. The incore thermocouple reference junction boxes, ET1 Model K81, used in conjunction with the subcooling meter will be replaced. E/P signal converter, No. SC35029, used to control a steam generator power operated relief valve (PORV) was identified by the licensee as not being environmentally qualified. The converter was a Fisher Controls type 546, contained in a NEC Class 1, Group D cnclosure. The convert.er for the other power operated relief valve was located on the opposite side of the sa=e room. Based on the information contained on page 2 of licensee A'~~ACECT 2

E. L. Jordan Septe=ber 26, 1980 letter to NRC dated March 13, 1980, it could not be concluded that the signal converter for at least one PORV was adequate to effect an,F orderly cooldown, i.e., survive the specified environment of 210 15.2 psia and 100% RH.i

  • Below flood level.

Ter=inations Various component termination devices were opened for inspection. Penetrations were terminated on Alan Bradley No.1492 terminal blocks installed in large junction boxes with covered panels; with Okonite splices; or covered with what appeared to be Scotch 27 tape. The latter two types were not protected by junction boxes. The Okonite splices were qualified by test. Other components such as solenoid valves and limit switches were terminated in junction boxes or handy boxes; however, no environmental credit was given to any protection which might be offered by the enclosures. The terminations were stated to have been covered with three layers of Scotch No. 70 tape, three layers of Permasel fiberglas tape and then a repeat of Scotch No. 70 tape. NOTE: A componegt evaluation worksheet was not included with the submittal Conclusion Except as reported above, motor insulation, solenoid valves, signal converters and terminations, the equipment descriptions provided by the licensee on the system ce=ponent evaluation worksheets for the systems identified were complete and accurate. 1The licensee was made aware of these discrepancies. A detailed review i vill be made by the licensee anc the response amended. i

  1. f i

.? r a GLGn Q. j##1-9 l D_W. Hayes, Chief / Enginee' ring Jepport Section 1

Attachment:

As Stated CC* J.G. Keppler l G. Fiorelli C. Fierabend, Res. Insp. V. D. Thomas, IE:HQ ATACEZC 2

ATTACIDINT LIST OF COMPONENTS hTM3ER UNIT GENERIC NAME SYSTEM INSIDE OUTSIDE MV-32132 1 Motor Operated Valve CL X MV-32135 1 Motor Operated Valve CL I MV-32068 1 Motor Operated Valve SI X MV-32020 2 Motor Operated Valve MS X 11 (DRF) 1 Dome Recirculation Fan ZC I' SV-33374 1 Solenoid Valve ZC X SV ~3377 1 Solenoid Valve ZC X SV-33440 1 Solenoid Valve ZP X SV-33441 1 Solenoid Valve ZP X SV-33261 2 Solenoid Valve MS X SV-33265 2 Solenoid Valve MS X CD-34074 1 Limit Switch ZC X i CD-34078 1 Limit Switch ZC X CV-31107 2 Limit Switch MS X 16796 1 Level Transmitter CS X 23015 l' Flow Transmitter MS X 15456 ,1 Junction Box RC X SC35029 2 Signal Converter MS X 1 Terminations ALL X A AC'CET: 2 n r v-- -,~r -ew-,r a- = ,-a

,g 3 ut.* t : :.';. i' 4N ',*. f r$ r C E M RE GUL aTC R v CU 'T,5:Or. i I j-' R E GIO'e f f' f c. 796 RooSLvf LT RoAO a g s.-*...*j cLEN ELLYN ILUNOls 60W July 23,1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: E. L. Jordan, Assistant Director, Division of Reactor Operations inspection, IE:HQ THRU: G. Florelli, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch FROM: D. W. Hayes, Chief. Engineering Support Section 2

SUBJECT:

lEB 79-01B (A/I F03067180) Attached is a copy of a memorandum dated July 17, 1980 reculved from Frank Jablonski relative to IEB 79-018. It is being forwarded for your information and solicited guidance. The question of identification of safety related systems and components (paragraph No. I of the memo) is an old one. I disagree with Frank in that I feel that this identification is a responsibility of the licensee, not the NRC. He must know his plant. I do agree, hwever, that more guidance is needed for our inspectors in this area. This is especially important for those inspectors that have not had reactor operating experience. The significant differences in master lists that Frank discusses in paragraph two does raise questions. We can only compare these lists against the SAR. Review and evaluation beyond this is assumed to be an NRR function. In regard to Frank's question - should we assume the licensee's response to IEB 79-01B to be complete and correct - I have told him yes.

Further, l

that if he identifies significant incompleteness in the response, or incorrect information during his reviews, to bring these to my attention so appropriate action can be recommended. Comments and further guidance is req. rested concerning matters discussed in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Frank's memo. d D. W. Hayes, Chief Engineering Support Section 2 Generic Issues ATTACHf'ENT 3a hk pplo033 l

I E. L. Jordan 2 July 23,1980 ,i

Attachment:

F. J. Jablonski Memo to D.W. Hayes dtd 7/17/80 4 t cc w/ attachment: J. G. Keppler, Ri l l V. D. Thomas, IE:HQ A. Finkel, RI R. Hardwick, Ril D. Mcdonald, RIV J. Elin, RV R. F. Heishman, Rlli -> F. J. Jab lonski, Ri ll L i i i { ATTACHMENT 3a

/pa ntog'e UNITED STATE 3 E's. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMJSSION c i g ",,., Y REGION lli o,, [ 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD

  • %/

p GLEN ELLYN,ILLINots 60137 July 17, ISfl0 -S MEMORANDUM FOR: D. W. Hayes, Chief, Enginee-ing Support Section 1 FROM: F. J. Jablonski, Reactor inspector

SUBJECT:

FORMULATlhG TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORTS (TER) - REVIEW OF lEB 79-01B RE: MEMO TO YOU DATED JUNE 16, 1980 - SAME SUBJECT Since the review of IEB 79-01B is continual, new discrepancies continue to show up; discrepancies are not necessarily the licensees'. As you know, there is no specific nuclear power plant design required by NRC. Further, the designation of safety related systems is sorewhat arbitrary and inconsistent. In fact, the NRC places responsibility for classifying safety related systems on the licensee. I Action item No. I of 79-018 requested each IIcensee to provide a " master list" of all ESF systems in their respective plant required to function during a postulated accident. Appendix A to 79-OlB lists " typical" equipment / functions needed foi mitigation of an accident. A comparison of master lists was made of four licensees with similar Westinghouse PWRs-(see Attachment 1). Arbitrary selection and non-standard nomenclature \\ of systems makes evaluation of the master lists extremely difficult. NRC( requested each IIcensee to submit the information under oath. Should the 1 information therefore be assumed complete and correct? j it is ehremely frustrating to review responses which vary so much in attention to detail, depth of review, etc. As stated previously in the i draft TER for D.C. Cook, because I as a principal reviewer lack detailed systems / operations experience, further guidance is requested. t Another TER related matter is motorized valves equipped with Limitorque operators (see Attachment 2). As can be seen, each test report is for a specific unit type including motor type and insulation class. Almost all licensees refer to the various test reports as qualification documentation for all series of operator types; never is name plate data e provided. For example, tes t report No. 600456 (SMB-0-40, Reliance Motor with Class RH insulation) may be listed for all operators from series SMB-000 to SMB-5; motor name plate data not provided. Without the name plate data and the basis for extrapolation, a meaningful evaluation cannot be made. ATTACHMENT 3a k d) yol23100 d l l y q,.-y- -,y ,,,v._, , - - -, _,,. - +

e D.W. Hayes July 17, 1980 It is requested that this memorandum be forwarded to IE:HQS as an addition to A/l F03067180 with the same copy distribution.

  • /

~ 5 %.' F. J. Jablonski j Reactor inspector Attachments: 1. Comparison of Master Lists 2. Motor Operated Valve Tests cc: 1 J. G. Keppler G. Flore111 l i 1 i l l l l ATTACHMENT 3a

t ATTACHMENT 1 SYSTEMS P.I. G.QQ& _KEL PT. BCH. Aux. F.W. X X X Chem. & Vol. Cont. X 2 X X Cntet. Air Hndtg. X X X Cntet. H Cont. X X 2 Cntmt. Sp. X X 1 Main Stm. X X X Aux. Stm. X Stm. Dump X Rx CLnt. X X X X Res. Ht. X 2 X 3 Saf.Inj.ym. X 2 X X CLg. Water X Esnt't. Serv. Wat. X Comp. CLg. Wat. X 3 Emerg. Corg CLg.2 1 X 1 Aux. CLnt. X Cntmt. Purge X Rx. B Ldg. Vent X Inst. & Prot. X Rx. Trip. Act. X Rx. Cont. & Prot. X Rad. Monit. X Rx. Hot Samp. X Stn. & Inst. Air X Stm. Gen.BD X Post Acc. Monit. X Rem. Sht. dn. Monit. X Cntmt. Isol. X X Mn. Stm. Isol. X Mn. FW Isol. X i i ATTACHMENT 3a l

o ATTACHMEf4T 2 MOTOR OPERATED VALVES MOV's 1. There are basically two type series of Limitorque operators: SMB and SB. The operators are sized from 000 (smallest') to 5 (largest) as follows: SMB-000_ SMB-00 SMB/SB-0 -})Thisseriesmay SMB/SB-1 This series may also also include WB y SMB/SB-2 include SB SMB/SB-3 SMB/SB-4 This series may SMB-5 be suffixed "T" 2. Test Reports include: Report No. Date Unit Type Environment Motor Type Insulation

a. 600198 1-2-69 SMB-0-15*

PWR Reli ance Special Hi No Radiation Temp

b. 600426 4-30-76 SMB-0-25*

BWR Peerless H 7 (B-0009) 1x10 R DC 340

c. 600376A 5-15-76 SMB-0-25*

BWR Reliance RH 8 FIRL F-C 2x10 3441

d. 600456 12-9-75 SMB-0-40*

PWR Reliance RH 8 2x10 l

e. 600461 6-7-76 SMB-0-25*

Outside Reliance B Cntmt 7 2x10

f. WCAP7410L 12-70 SMB-00 8

7744 8-71

  • denotes foot pounds of torque only SMB-0 has been tested seismically Re: a, b, c ATTACHMENT 3a

-~

l pe Rtc oq'o UNITED STATES l' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

3 y

wAssiscToN. o. c. 20sss s a / SSINS #6820 JUI. 3 1930 . MEMORANDUM FOR: Z. R. Rosztoczy, Branch Chief. Equipment Qualification Branch, Division of Engineering, NRR M THRU: E f . L. Jordan, Assistant Director for Technical Programs, Division of Reactor Operations Inspection. LE FROM: V. D. Thomas, Task Manager, Review Group, IEB 79-018 Division of Reactor Operations Inspection, IE

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR NRC POSITIONS ON REVIEW QUESTIONS OF IEP-79-01B LICENSEE RESPONSES In accordance to our verbal. agreement, we would be happy if you would provide positions on the questions noted in the enclosed memoranda. Since it is essential to establish a unifonn approach to the review effort - to obviate the questions being generated in the on-going review of licensee responses, we will be happy to meet with your staff to discuss these concerns to expedite resolution of the issues. ~ b'M Vincent D. Thomas', Task Manager Review Group, IEB 79-01B

Enclosures:

1. Memo D. W. Hayes to G. Fiorelli, RIII di.ted June 20, 1980. 2. Memo F. Jablonski to D. Hayes, RIII dated Jun 16, 1980. 3. Memc F. Jablonski to D. Hayes, RIII ~ DATED June 10, 1980. cc: w/ enclosures E. L. Jordan, IE V. S. Noonan, NRR G. Fiorelli, 'RIII D. W. Hayes, RIII A. Finkel, RI R. Hardwick, RII

f. Jablonski, RIII D. Mcdonald, RIV J. Elin, RV dUL 71980 ATTACHMENT 3a

8 'c UNITED ST ATES l 'y.,,. [{ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, gg,;,r/ p REGION ill o, go g

799 ROOSEVELT ROAD 'N/ ,e GLEN ELLYN. ILLINots 60137

  • ...+

June 20, 1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: E. L. Jordan, Assistant Director, Division of Reactor Operations inspection, IE:HQ THRU: M. Flore111, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch FROM: D. W. Hayes, Chief, Engineering Support Section 1

SUBJECT:

IEB 79-01B (A/l F03067180) Attached are two memorandums from one of my inspectors, Frank Jablonski. I The first is dated June 10, 1980 and the second June 16, 1980. Both memos raise basic questions for which we require guidance to complete our review of responses to IEB 79-018. By this memo I also would like to confirm our understanding that NRR (Environmental qualification Branch) will review for acceptability all test reports and other documentation which IIcensees reference as establishing environmental qualification of instrument / electrical equipment. In connection with this, we are sending under separate cover test reports, etc. In our possession to be forwarded to the Environmental qualification Branch. (We further understand that the IEB 79-01B task grotr, on a volunteer basis, may agree to review some of these documents). The status or schedule for site inspections and review / evaluation of the final reports is also attached. Please note that every IIcensee has asked for some sort of time extension to submit their first report. We understand that the other regions have had similar reporting problems. Assuming that all our IIcensees meet their extended submittal dates, we should complete our site Inspections, reviews, and technical evaluation k i F 9070$9-ATTACHMENT 3a

E. L. Jordan June 20, 1980 2 reports by the end of December 1980. Further delays in the submittals or any unforeseen events will hamper our ability to meet the new February 1,1981 deadline. l ss a$*# / i D. W. Haye Chief Engineering Support Section 1 Attachments: 1. Memo F. Jablonski to D. Hayes 6/10/80 2. Memo F. Jablonski to D. Hayes 6/16/80 3. Inspection Status / Schedule 4. " Separate Cover" List (Test Reports Sent to IE:HQ) - Sepa rate' Cover: See Attachcent 4 cc w/ attachments 1, 3, & 4 only: J. G. Keppler G. Fiorelli V. D. Thomas, IE:HQ A. Finkel, R1 l R. Hardwick, Rii D. Mcdonald, RIV J. Elin, RV R. F. Heish=an t s l l ATTACHMENT 3a

i-t p 'c UNITED ST ATES I \\*,,.. l[,7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3-i a-g REGION ill .[ [ 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD g s.,.. g cLEN ELLYN, ILLINols 60137 June 10,1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: D. W. Hayes, Chief, Engineering Support Section 1 FROM: F. J. Jablonski, Reactor Inspector

SUBJECT:

EFFECT OF PREVIOUS NRR REVIEW ON MATTERS RELATING TO IEB 79-01B In almost every licensee response to IES 79-018 there is a subtle or direct reference to matters apparently reviewed by NRR. Because-of the referenced dates it is assumed by me that NRR has given either tacit or direct approval to the references; examples follow: 1. All licensees refer to their FSARs for establishing the list of engineered safety feature systems and environmental data such as temperature, pressure, radiation, etc. 2. One licensee, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, states that "The AEC, in their " Safety Evaluation of the Kewaunee Plant", Section 7.5, issued July 24, 1972, concluded that t cur criteria and testing program for environmental quali fication were adequate". It is further stated that "Our FSAR, which was approved by the AEC, discusses at length the post accident conditions and required qualifi-cations for applicable equipment. (See Section 7.5 of the Kewaunee FS AR.)" l-3. 'wo licensees, American Electric Power and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, have discussed the effect of-components below flood level simply by referencing letters previously submitted to the NRC, or FSAR questions / answers as follows:

  • AEP

- Letter dated 9-29-75 from Tillinghast (AEP) to Kniel (NRC); FSAR question 40.10 Appendix 0.

  • WPSC - Letter dated 2-2-76 f rom James (WPSC) to Purple (NRC).

l 6 ATTACHMENT 3a 1ogio70M7 f

[ June 10,1980 2 D. W. Hayes My specific concerns are: Is it to be assumed that the referenced FSAR parameters, No. 1 above, are correct, i.e. reviewed by NRR? If the answer is yes, then should it also be assumed that No. 2 above is likewise adequate? (If the answer is no, then none of the licensee responses which reference the FSAR can be assumed to be correct.) Reference No. 3, even though a component may not be required to operate subsequent to flooding, what effect will short circuits have on containment electrical penetrations? Was this considered by NRR? I am requesting that these questions / concerns be forwarded to the Assistant Director, Division of Reactor Operations Ins?ection for resolution. Ch Z l t l F. J. Jablonski j Reactor Inspector cc: l J. G. Keppler l G. Fiorelli ATTACHMENT 3a i l

o, UNITED STATES 2jo 5 pb[. $ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COTwifAISSION y,g REGION til

  • di![I f

799 RoosEvE LT ROAD o %/ j GLEN ELLYN. ILLINols 60137 June 16,1980 4 MEMORANDUM FOR: D. W. Hayes, Chief, Engineering Support Section 1 FROM: F. J. Jablonski, Reactor Inspector

SUBJECT:

FORMULATING TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORTS (TER) - REVIEW OF IEB 79-018 in accordance with IEB 79-01B, an overall conclusion relative to the qualification of instrument electrical equipr.ent is to be made for each operating plant based on a screening revies of all plant systems, and by a detailed review and observation of specific system components. Un resol ves' concerns previously' identified b,' Rlll inspectors during reviews of IEC 78-08 and IEB 79-01 along with subsequently identified concerns make it difficult for us to formulate meaningful TERs for certain plants. The previous unresolved concerns are documented in the memorandums listed below (1,2,3) and are rei terated in Attachment A to this memo. Subsequently identified concerns are IIsted in Attachments B, C, and D. To assure uniform evaluation, guidance is needed for these items. Please forward these concerns to IE:HQ. 1. Ti 2515/13 - Qualification of Safety Related Electrical Equipment Florelli to Sniezek, 10/13/78 2. Same title as 1., Florelli to Klinger, 12/78 3. Review Status of Responses to IEB 79-01, Hayes to Jordan, 9/5/79 f h.,y(- F. J. Jablonski Reactor inspector

Enclosures:

As Stated cc: J. G. Keppler G. Florelli V. D. Thoma s, I E : HQ A. Finkel, Rt R. Hardwick, Ril D. Mcdonald, RIV J. Elin, RV ATTACHMENT 3a 300Y070N D[h [$8[O}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20004C132&oldid=4674182"