ML20043F487
| ML20043F487 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1990 |
| From: | Sears P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Papanic G YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| GL-89-10, IEB-85-003, IEB-85-3, TAC-75740, NUDOCS 9006150060 | |
| Download: ML20043F487 (3) | |
Text
-
L...
/
' r [,
UNITED STATES
.g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'g
~j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$$5
\\..... #'
June 11, 1990 Docket No.50-029 i
i Mr. George Papanic, Jr.
Senior Pro.iect Engineer - Licensing Yankee Atomic Electric Company
$80 Main Street-Bolton, Massachusetts 01740-1398 i
Dear Mr. Papanic:
j
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 89-10 " SAFETY-RELATED MOTOR-OPERATED VALVE (MOV) TESTING AND SURVEILLANCE" (TAC No. 75740)
On June 28,1989, thehRCissuedGenericLetter(GL)89-10requestingthe l
establishment of a program to ensure the operability of all safety-related MOVs under design basis conditions. The program in GL 89-10 significantly expands the scope of the program outlined in NRC Bulletin 85-03 and its i
supplement.
On December 27, 1989, you submitted a response to GL 89-10. " Safety-Related Motor-Operated Valve-Testing and Surveillance," regarding the Yankee Rowe Nuclear Power Plant. Therein, you advised the NRC of your intentions on
. meeting the schedule and recomendations of the generic letter. Several comments on your submittal are provided below, in the generic letter, the staff requested that a description of the generic letter program be available for review by NRC personnel by June 28, 1990, or the first refueling outage after December 28,~1989, whichever is later. On page 6 of your submittal, you proposed to complete the program description by November 30, 1990. This schedule is acceptable to the NRC staff. At the public workshops held in September 1989 to discuss the generic letter, the NRC staff indicated the information that should be contained in the program description. You should review the workshop results when they become available and provide justification for any differences with the staff positions in your program description.
In your response to Item e of the GL, you state that full differential
-pressure testing will be performed unless, among other things, the test would violate the plant's Technical Specifications. You should explain this consideration in determining whether a test is practicable in more detail in your program description.
In your response to item f of the generic letter, you state that when full differentialpressuretestingcannotbeperformedandwhereapp1Icabletest data are not available, you will utilize a comercially available statistical database. As discussed at the workshops, recent research results and operating experience have revealed that the application of test data from one MOV to another is not always reliable. Also at the workshops, the staff discussed W06/50 0 7 ppg ffR Moc~o osomiq Po c-g%j Io
)
~.:
.~
1. '
s several alternatives to design. basis testing of MOVs in. situ and the factors to be considered in justifying the use of those alternatives. The concerns regarding the applicability of test data are especially valid for a statistical database. The staff suggests that, where an MOV cannot be tested in situ
-under design. basis conditions and the applicability of test data to that MOV cannot be justified, you use the "two stage" approach as outlined in the GL and discussed at the workshops. The statistical database mentioned by you may l
[
be useful in the first stage. The second stage of this approach would serve l
to obtain the best applicable test data as soon as possible.
j Your response to Item i of the GL indicated the schedule for completing your MOV program will not be determined until November 30, 1990.
In accordance with Item 1 of the generic letter, you are required to submit a schedule for your progrem along with justification for any differences from the GL schedule.
Please submit your schedule and any justifications by November 30, 1990.
Sincerel,
\\6 i
Patrick Sears, Project Manager Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II cc:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
DocketIUa 50e029]
HRC & Local PDRs PDI-3 R/F SVarga BBoger MRushbrook RWessman PSears AChu OGC(info)
EJordan ACRS(10)
AGody TScartfough LMarsh
- See previous concurrence j
OFC
- PDI-3/LA
- PDI-3/PE
- PDIM3/PM
- EMEB
- PDI 3/ g
....__ :...............:..........___.:..........___.:........ g..__.:....
g,...___:.......__....
HAME.:.
k*
- AChu *
- PSears
- LMarsh
- RWessman
......:(..............: ____.........:..............:..___.....____:. __......___.:.........____
- 1 /90
/ /90
- 4/6/90
- 6/1 /90
/ 1/90
=,DATE 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name: YR GL 8910 RESPONSE
G
^..
Mr. George Pepanic,'Jr.
Yankee Rowe cc:
l.
Dr. Andrew C. Kadak, President and Chief Operating Officer L
Yankee Atomic Electric Company SP0 Main Street c
Bolton, Massachusetts' 01740-1398 Thomas Dignan, Esquire Ropes and Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Mr. T. K. Henderson Acting. Plant Superintendent Yankee Atomic Electric Company Star Route Rowe, Massachusotts 01367 Resident Inspector Yankee Nuclear Power Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
~ Post Office Box 28 Monroe Bridge, Massachusetts 01350 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Robert M. Hallisey, Director Radiation Control Program Massachusetts Department of Public Health i
150 Tremont Street, 7th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111 q
Mr. George Sterzinger Comissioner Vermont Department of Public Service 120 State Street, 3rd Floor Montpelier, Vermont 05602 j
Ms. Jane M. Grant Senior Engineer - PLEX Licensing Yankee Atomic Electric Company 580 Main Street Bolton, Massachusetts 03740-1398
.-.