ML20049H254
| ML20049H254 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Oconee |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1982 |
| From: | Speis T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033C447 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-176, RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.K.2.09, TASK-TM NUDOCS 8202170408 | |
| Download: ML20049H254 (7) | |
Text
.,, _,,, _,, _
_ _ ~,
-m.,_ _, _ _ _
._..m_..._.
j ~%
O A
EbI6 0
':* ric tiATES U
e U4 GULt TORY CO*.W:sSION t '-F'WTON. D. C. 20555 E
i
~
[
)
JAN 2 81982 i
1 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Thomas t'ovak, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors Division of Licensing FROM:
Themis P. Speis, Assistant Director for Reactor Safety Division of Systems Integration
SUBJECT:
NUREG-0737, ITEM II.K.2.9, FAILURE MODE EFFECTS ANALYSIS ON THE INTEGRATED CONTROL SYSTEM Plant Name: Oconee Nuclear Station c
j Docket Nos.:
50-269/270/287 Licensing Status:
OR TAC Nos.: 42794, 42795, a2796 Responsible Branch: Cperating Reactors Branch #4 Project Manager:
M. Padovan Review Branch:
ICSB Review Status: Complete Attached is a Safety Evaluation Report on NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9,
" Failure Mode Effects Analysis on the Integrated Control System" for the Oconee units..
n ICSB has reviewed the information on the Integrated Control System pro-vided by Duke Power Company and B&W Report BAW-1564, " Integrated Control System Reliability Analysis" and found that the Oconee design meets all current regulatory requirements.
ICSB has not identified any c,ontrol system failures or actions that would lead to unacceptable consequences at Oconee.
1 i
The issue of ICS failures will no longer be pursued on a plant by plant basis. All vendor designs and all control systems that affect plant safety will now be reviewed under Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-47.
The purpose of this USI is to perform in depth evaluations of control systems and to evaluate the adequacy of current licensing requirements.
i l
Consequently, no additional licensing action is to be taken at this time, and NUREG-0737 Item II.K.2.9 is considered closed for Oconee.
Resolution of USI A-47 will determine if it will be necessary to impose additional d
and more stringent requirements on control systems in the future.
I 3
Contact:
5 C. E. Rossi X27140
?'bf l
3Yca17aym;
\\
],
.J
..._..;.__...~._._.-.-..._.. _ ___.... _.
.. _ i._ J ;i..
._1 J _ _. _ 1 i.._.
s L
O O
l-J t
I If you have any cuestions on this subject, please contact C. E. Rossi in ICSB.
y D c'
/~hlAt \\.
s Themis P. Speis, Assistant Director l
for Reactor Safety Division of Systems Integration i
1 Attachr:ent:
As stated cc:
R. Mattson F. Rosa J. Stolz R. Capra o Triolett 9
i M. Padovan P. Wagner 9
?
1 l
- l 1
h 1
)
i d
I i
i l
'I l
i
n_.
-~__._-.-...--.A...~
O O
L SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEARJREACTOR -REGULATTON
'OCONEE RUCLEAR' STATION DOCKET NOS. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287 FAILURE MODE EFFECTS ANALYSIS ON THE INTEGRATED CONTROL SYSTEM j
t NUREG-0737, ITEM II.K.2.9 Felicwing the Three Mile Island Unit 2 event, the staff expressed concerns re;;rding the response of Babcock & Wilcox (BAN) desian reactors to transients.
[
Since the staff did not perform a detailed review of failure modes and potential L
interactions within the Integrated Control System (ICS), it was unsure of the role the ICS might play in initiating or exacerbating transients. There-fore, the staff required a failure made and effects analysis (FMEA) of the 4
J system.
In August,1979, B&W submitted a report, BAW-15tia, " Integrated q
'i Control System Reliability Analysis", which provided the results of a b
FMEA and an operating history review for the ICS installed at all oper-j ating B&W plants.
BAW-1564 was endorsed by the licensee as applicable to the Oconee Nuclear Station.
The staff completed its review of BAW-1564 through a technical assistance contract with Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). As a result of this f
review, both the staff and ORNL concluded that the ICS itself had a re-latively low failure rate and did not appear to initiate a significant
)
number of plant upsets.
However, there were aspects of the plant control system and related components outside the ICS for which improvements should be investigated.
In BAW-1564, B&W recommended six actions aimed at improving e
system performance.
In November,1979, the licensees with B&W plants (except Three Mile Island Unit 1) were requested to address the B&W recommendations.
i i
T ~~
~
.._..__m_.___
~~c----
?
O O
I Duke Power Company letter dated December 21, 1979, provided the Duke A
I position on the B&W recommendations as requested by the staff.
i summary of the response on each recommendation is as follows:
i i
- 1) The staff asked Duke to address the B&W recommendation to improve the reliability of the t'on-Nuclear Instrumentation (NNI)/ICS power supply.
Duke described equipment modifications to be made to I
~
In improve the reliability of the power supply to these systems.
.. to Duke Power Ccmpany letter dated July 23,1980, Duke delineated further equipment modifications and emergency procedure changes for use in mitigating the effects of power supply failures.
- 2) The staff asked Duke to address the B&W recommendation to improve the reliability of the input signal from the Nuclear Instrumentation /
- i Reactor Protection System to the ICS - specifically, the Reactor Coolant flow signal. Duke stated that consideration was being given to auctioneering two flow signals on each loop as input to'the
(
ICS in order to improve reliability of the flow signal.
Sub-l sequent to the letter of December 21, 1979, Duke concluded that the reliability of the existing flow measurement system had 1
been such that no modification was needed.
C I
1 l i a
i
_.T 3 y 4
_L
-m--
F l'
O n
v
- 3) The staff asked Duke to address the B&W recommendation to improve ICS/ Balance of Plant tuning, particularly the interaction between the feedwater condensate systems and the ICS controls. The staff further asked that the licensee address any particular operational problems experienced with the ICS, procedures used by the operator l
to take manual control of ICS functions, and ICS training crovided for the operators.
Duke indicated that some problems had occurred during startup due to excess leakage through the Main Feedwater Valves.
Duke described a maintenance program for these valves and other modifications being made to improve the reliability of the feedwater/ condensate system.
fio specific procedures are used to tell the operator when to intervene with automatic ICS l
control, but, rather operator training is relied upon to enable the operators to decide when it is appropriate and necessary to take manual control.
b
- 4) The staff asked Duke to address the B&W recommendation to im-prove the main feedwater pump turbine drive minimum speed c~ontrol.
Duke stated that a modification was being made to increase the oil pressure to the main feedwater pump to prevent loss during minimum speed control.
1
- 5) The staff asked Duke to address the means of preventing or mitigating i
the consequences of a stuck-open main feedwater startup valve.
Duke c
stated that the valves will be tested for leakage and proper operation during every refueling outage.
If a valve sticks open, the operator can close the block valve to mitigate the consequences.
{.'
o o
- 6) The staff asked Duke to address the means of preventing or mitigating i
Duke indicated the consequences of a stuck-open turbine bypass valve.
that if a valve sticks open, the operator mitigates the consequences by closing the block valve.
f In May,1981, subsequent to the review of the response on the B&W re-l' The r
commendations, the staff held a meeting with Duke Power Company.
meeting was held not only to review the specific Duke response to the B&W recommendations, but also to provide the staff with an opportunity i
to better understand the details of the ICS design and its effect on B&W representatives were in attendance at this meeting plant safety.
to give a presentation on the functions of the ICS and respond to staff The basic contention was questions on the effects of failures in the ICS.
that plant transients caused by ICS failures will be terminated by the Reactor Protection System prior to exceeding any plant. safety limit.
S
,h Based on the meeting with Duke Power Company and reviews made to date, the staff has identified no specific control system failures oc actions t
a which would lead to unacceptable consequences nor any control system de-li sign feature on B&W designed plants which violates any Commission regu-i I
The staff has concluded that little more can be gained by pur-lation.
l suing the issue of control system failures on a plant by plant basis for j
operating plants', but, rather intends to pursue the issue on a broader basis which will include all vendor designs and all control systems that a
could affect plant safety. The Commission has designated the " Safety i
i Impications of Control Systems" (USI A-47) as an Unresolved Safety Issue (see NUREG-0705, " Identification of flew Unresolved Safety Issues Relating to Nuclear Power Plants, Special Report to Congress" dated March 1981).
The purpose of this Unresolved Safety Issue is to perform in-depth evalu-1 i
...;:.. LL
.. y. a.
i
- _ n _~.-w.
_ _. a,
...:n,.-.>.,._.,._
p l.*.
(q a
o f
ations of control systems that are typically used during normal plant i:
operation and to evaluate the adequacy of current licensing requirements.
1 In sumary, t'he staff has reviewed the Reliability Analysis of the ICS (BAW-1564) and the licensee's response to the six recomendations con-t f
tained in BAW-1564.
Based upon these reviews, the staff believes that J
the Oconee design meets all current regulatory requirements.
In addition, I
since the staff has not identified any specific control system failures or actions that would lead to unacceptable consequences, the staff does not believe that any additional immediate licensing action is warranted at this time.
However, for the longer term, USI A-47, which was begun
)
in December 1980, has as its principle task, the assessment of the Re-i adequacy of current regulatory requirements for control systems.
solution of A-47 will determine whether it will be necessary to impose additional and more stringent requirements on control systems in the w
future.
e>'
'I C
l I
l b
I Re:
F0IA-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1 1.
Note to ICSBers from Rod re: Testimony by Jim 10/17/80 20 Conran of the Systems Interaction Branch for the TMI-l restart hearing 2.
Memo for DSI Personnel from Denwood F. Ross, 10/30/80 22 Jr., re: Safety Terminology used in TMI-l Restart Hearing Testimony 3.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to J. Conran 2/2/81 4
from M. S. Medeiros, Jr., re: Criteria for Determining Requirements for Systems Important to Safety 4.
Note to Jim from Manny re: Decisionstfor 2/2/81 21 Degraded Cooling Rulemaking 5.
Memo for E. C. Wenzinger from M. S. Medeiros, 7/22/80 4
Jr., re: IEEE Standard for Classifying Instru-mentation, Control and Electrical Equipment Important to Safety 6.
Memo for T. E. Murley et. al. from W. M.
9/23/80 2
Morrison re: Standards Review Request 7.
Note to AH-1 Members from E. F. Dowling re:
3/23/82 4
Minutes of AH-1 Meeting 82-1 8.
Letter to Edward F. Dowling from Demetrois L.
3/3/82 2
Basdekas re: Meeting on Classification of Systems Important to Safety 9.
Letter to E. F. Dowling from Robert B.
10/26/81 1
Minogue re: Appointing Member to Ad Hoc Committee on Classification of Systems Important to Safety 10.
Safety-Related Equipment Identification Undated 23 (Vugraphs)
- 11. Memo to R. E. Allen from J. M. Gallagher, Jr.,
7/1 3/81 3
re: Instrumentation, Control and Electrical Systems Important to Safety
Re: F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1 12.
Routing Slip to E. Weiss et. al. from Demetrois 6/17/81 5
Basdekas re: Draft Outline for a Regulatory Guide on Classification and Design Require-ments 13.
" Criteria for Electric, Instrumentation and 4/5/82 14 Control Portions of Safety Systems" (Draft)
- 14. Task Network Forms and Schedules re:
Various Dates 49 Appendices A and B 15.
Draft Plan of Action for Resolving NRR Comments 2/8/82 4
On Proposed Appendix A/B Rule 16.
Handwritten Notes re: The Impact the Rule 1/21/82 1
Would Have on Industry 17.
Handwritten Notes by Bill re: Appendix A/B 2/5/82 1
Rule
- 18. Memo for H. R. Denton from R. B. Minogue re:
2/4/82 3
Continued Development of Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 to Clarify the Relationship Between Appendix A and Appendix B 19.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to W. Haass et. al.
6/9/81 1
from S. Richardson re: Draft Commissione Paper
- 20. Handwritten Notes re: Comments from the Nature Undated 2
of the Regulatory Process 21.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to W. Haass et.
6/9/81 24 al. from S. Richardson re: Draft Commission Paper 22.
Handwritten Notes re: Various Meetings Undated 1
- 23. Memo for W. J. Dircks from R. B. Minogue re:
Undated 4
Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B
- 24. Memo for W. J. Dircks from R. B. Minogae re:
T!/20 4
Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B
Re: F01A-82-176 Appendix A Descr,iption Date Pages l
Item 1
- 25. Memo for William J. Dircks from Robert B. Minogue 11/10/81 6
re: Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B
- 26. Memo for W. J. Dircks from R. B. Minogue re:
11/4/81 5
Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A add Appendix B 27.
Note to Bill re: Changes in memo for Dircks Undated 5
from Minogue dated 9/30/81 28.
Haddwritten Notes re: Appendix A/B Rule 10/27/81 13 29.
Handwritten Note re: Changes to Memo for 8/21/81 27 The Commissioners from W. J. Dircks 30.
Handwritten Notesrre: Quality Assurance Undated 7
Activities 31.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to K. Goller et.
7/8/81 3
al. from W. Belke re: Memo for W. J. Dircks from Minogue 32.
Memo for V. Stello et. al. from K. R. Goller 7/15/81 30 re: Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B 33.
Draf t Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
10/30/80 21 Minogue re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify' the Quality Assurance Program Requirements 34.
Draf t Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
9/12/80 18 Minogue re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify the Quality Assurance Program Requirements 35.
Draf t Proposed Rule to Clarify the Quality Undated 5
Assurance Program Requirements 36.
Draft Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
Undated 19 Minogue re: Propoted Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify Quality Assurance Program Requirements
I' Re:
Appendix A Description Date Pages item 1
- 37. Memo for Ihe Commissioners from W. J. Dircks Undated 21 re: Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B (Draft)
- 38. Memo for The Commistioners from W. J. Dircks Undated 23 re: Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A arid Appendix B (Draft)
- 39. Handwritten Note re: Attached Memo for 12/19/80 4-George Knighton from C. E. Rossi re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify the Quality Assurance Program Requirements, dated 12/16/80
~
40.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to G. Arlotto 10/24 14 et. al. from S. D. Richardson re: Valtie/
Impact Statement l
- 41. Memo for S. D. Richardson from T. F. Darian 10/15/80
2 re: Relationship of the Quality Assurance Program Required by Criterion 1 in Appendix A of Part 50 to the Quality Assurance Program Required by Appendix B of Part 50 42.
Draft Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
9/12/80 23 m
Minogue re: Proposed Amendment toll 0 CFR Part 50 Appendix 4 to Clarify Quality Assurance Program Requirements 43.
Draft Memo for The Commissioners from Rot'ert 9/12/60
,120 Minogue re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Pact 50 Appendix A to Clarify Quality Assurance d,,
Program Requirements 44.
Draft Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
9/24/80
' 20 Minogue re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part '
50 Appendix A to Clarify the Quality Assurance j
Program Requirements 45.
Routing Slip to T. Dorian et. al. from S.
Undated 1
7 Richardson re: Draf t Commission Paper s
t; s
_ = - _ _ -
- - _ - - = _ _
g' Re:
F0!A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1 46' Draf t Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
9/24/80 22 Minogue re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify Quality Assurance Program Requirements 47.
Draf t Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
Undated 13 Minogue re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify the Quality Assurance Program Requirements 48.
Memo for R. F. Fraley frcm G. A. Arlotto re:
5/30/80 18 Proposed Arendment to 10 CFR 50, Appendix A to Reference 10 CFR 50, Appendix B 49.
Memo for W. M. Morrison from D. J. Skovholt re:
2/28/80 3
l Proposed Rulemaking Request 50 Handwritten Note re: Dirck's Comments on 2/15/80 1
Appendix A and Appendix B 51.
Handwritten Note re: Froposed Rulemaking 2/28/80 1
Comments
'52.
Note to M. Peranich from W. Haass re: Appendix 10/31/79 1
A vs. Appendix B Issue 53.
Draft Memo for The Commissioners from Minogue 9/4/79 6
Quality Assurance Program Requirements l,
54.
Draft Memo for The Commissioners from R. B.
9/4/79 6
I Minogue re: Quality Assurance Program i
Requirements
- 55.
Routing Slip to W. M. Morrison from D. Beckham 1/12/78 10 l
re: Draft of Appendix B - Reg Guide 56 Memo for S. Levine et. al from M. Kehnemuyi 7/18/77 15 p
i re: Reg Guide Review Request 57.
Memo for V. Stello et. al. from K. Goller re:
7/81 26 j.
Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B 58 Routing Slip to Bill Bekle from Dick re:
8/20/81 2
j_
Draft Memo for K. R. Goller from H. R. Denton dated 8/19/81 3
1 7
Re: F0!A-82-176' Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1 59.
NRC Staff Testimony of James H. Conran Before Undated 19 the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board l
- 60. Routing and Transmittal Slip to W. Haass et.
2/25/81 11 al. from W. M. Morrison re: NQA Main Committee Meeting 61.
Memo for H. Denton from D. Ross, Jr., re: Non-1/29/81 7
Concurrence on " Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR 50 Appendix A to Clarify Quality Assurance Program Requirements"
- 62. Memo for The Commissioners from W. J. Dircks Undated 23 re: Appendix A and B 63.
Memo for Ray Smith from Guy Cunningham, III 1/9/81 1
re: Quality Assurance Program Requirements
- 64. Memo for M. Malsbh from M. Kehnemuyi re:
4/7/78 2
Extent of Applicability of Appendix B
- 65. Note to R. H. Vollmer from W. Morrison re:
12/3/75 6
Conrnents on Proposed Reg Guide 66.
NRC Quality Assurance Workgroup Report -
2/77 45 feasibility Study 67.
NRC Quality Assurance Workgrr'ap Report -
4/77 30 feasibility Study 68.
Note to D. Vassallo et al. from F. Williams 7/21/77 1
re: Reg Guide Review Request
- 69. Memo for W. Haass from W. Morrison re: Proposed 8/31/79 1
Reg Guide 1.XXX 70.
Working Paper by D. Beckham re: Reg Guide 1.XXX 2/8/78 7
71.
Reg Guide 1.XYZ 3/24/76 31 72.
Summary of Significant Items in Appendix A Undated 4
Not Included in Appendix B
Re:
F0!A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1
- 75. Value/ Impact State for Reg Guide - Handwritten Undated 9
Notes 76.
Regulatory Guide 1.XXX (Draft)
Undated 5
77.
Federal Register, Vol. 38, No. 218 11/13/73 4
- 78. Federal Register, Vol. 34, No. 73 4/17/69 4
79.
Boiling Water Safety List 4/30/79 18
- 80. Pressurized Water Safety List 4/30/79 18 81.
Probable Problem Areas with Appendix A List -
Undated 2
Handwritten Notes 82.
Handwritten Notes re: Quality Standards and 11/2 16 Records 83.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to W. Morrison 11/19/81 6
et. al. from W. P. Haass re: IOQATF Meeting 84.
FY 1983 Program Statement of Work - Classi-Undated 6
fication of Equipment Important to Safety 85.
Letter to Edward Dowling from D. L. Basdekas 3/3/82 2
re: Classification 6f Systems Important to Safety
- 86. Letter to E. Iansiti from E. C. Wenzinger re:
6/25/81 9
USA Comments on SG-D8
- 87. Note to Steve from Bill re: Sandia Contract 3/19/82 6
88.
Draf t Proposed Rulemaking on Qualification of 3/10/82 11 Equipment Important to Safety
- 89. Memo of Call to Belke from Charlotte re: Call 2/3/82 6
from El-Bassioni on the SNL Project 90.
FY 1982 Program Statement of Work - Classificai Undeted 2
tion of Systems Important to Safety 91.
FY 1982 Program Statement of Work Program -
Undated 5
Identification of Equipment Important to Safety
)
1
Re:
F0!A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1
- 92. Handwritten Notes re: Identification of Equip-1/28/82 9
ment Important to Safety for Draft Typing 93.
Draf t Identification of Equipment Important 2/1/82 6
to Safety - FY 1982 Program Statement of Work 94.
Draf t Ident'ification of Equipment Important 2/4/82 5
to Safety - FY 1982 Program Statemer.t of Work 95.
Handwritten Notes re: SNL Work Statement 2/1 9
96.
Routing Slip to K. Goller from B. Kelke re:
2/12/82 5
Draf t Statement of Work for Review and Comments 2'18/82 6
97.
Draft Identification of Equipment Importart
/
to Safety - FY 82 Program Statement of Work 98.
Ilandwritten Note re: Minor Corrections 2/18/82 2
99.
Handwritten Note re: Changes on Work Scope 2/22/82 3
100.
Note re: Indicated Changes on Statement of 2/23/82 4
Work 101.
Classification of Equipment Important to 4/7/82 4
Safety - FY 1982 Program Statement of Work l
102.
FY 82 Statement of Work 4/6/82 4
103.
FY 82 Statement of Work 4/5/82 4
104.
Note re: Priority Typing for Statement of 4/5/82 5
Work 105.
Summary of Comments Received on Sandia Proposal Undated 3
(Enclosure 3) 106 W. Morrison's Comments on FY 1982 Program 4/2/82 4
Statement of Work 107.
Note to Charlotte re: Changes Indicated on 4/1/82 6
Statement of Work
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description _
Date Pages item 1 108 FY 82 Program Statement of Work re: Classifica-3/31/82 4
tion of Equipment Important to Safety 109.
Note to Charlotte re: Corrections to 3/30/82 5
Statement of Work 110. Note to Charlotte re: Corrections to 3/30/82 6
Statement of Work 111. Note to Charlotte re: Corrections to 3/26/82 8
Statement of Work 112.
Handwritten Notes re: Safety Meeting 3/24/82 5
113.
Note to Charlotte re: Corrections to 3/23/82 5
Statement of Work 114 Note to Charlotte re: Final Typing of 3/23/82 6
Statement of Work 115.
Routing Slip to Bill Belke from Ray D. re:
Undated 9
Tasks Listed in Program Brief 116.
FY 82 Program Statement of Work re: Classifica-3/17/82 4
tion of Equipment Important to Safety 117.
Handwritten Note re: Sandia Wcrk State-2/26/82 6
ment 118.
Note to Charlotte re: Corrections to 3/23/82 5
Statement of Work 119.
Handwritten Note re: Statement of Work 2/25/82 7
120.
Sandia Slides Undated 13 121.
Handwritten Notes re: Sandia Draft 12/16/81 4
Proposal 122.
Handwritten Notes re: TMI/Sandia Info 6/29/81 16 123. Memo for James Norberg from W. Belke re:
12/15/81 2
Meeting Notice
Re:
F04A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 1 124. Memo for George Knighton from James Norberg re:
10/8/81 1
Identification of Equipment Important to Safety 125.
Haddwritten Note re: Preliminary Comments on 10/20/81 1
Sandia Proposal by R. Silver 126. Memo for James A. Norberg from George Knighton 11/25/81 2
re: Proposed Program Regarding Ider.tification of Systems Important to Safety 127.
Note to Dick Silver from Ashok Thadani re:
11/18/81 1
Comments on Sandia Proposal " Identification of Equipment Important to Safety" 128. Memo for Richard Silver from Walter Haass re:
10/21/81 1
Routing Slip, Silver to Haass, et.
c.l., dated 10/16/81 129. Memo for J. A. Norberg from L. C. Shao re:
11/9/81 2
Identification of Equipment Important to Safety 130. Memo for James Norgerg from Donald Sullivan re:
10/15/81 1
Identification of Equipment Important to Safety 1 31.
Handwritten Notes re: Meeting on Sandia 8/20/81 7
132.
Standard Review Plan re: Control Systems Not Undated 5
Required for Safety (NUREG-75/087) 133.
Project and Budget Proposal for NRC Work re:
10/1/81 7
Identification of Equipment Important to Safety 134.
Handwritten Note re: Res. Rev. Group 1/27/81 65 135.
DOE Report - Light Water Reactor Engineered 8/81 69 Safety Features Status Monitoring (NUREG/CR-2278) 136. Letter to John Spraul from J. H. Ta lor re:
8/20/81 56 Revision 4 of Topical Report BAW 10096A 137. Work Statement - Methods for Modeling and 10/7/81 62 Simulation of Nuclear Systems Reliability and Safety, Submitted by Frank Tillman
Re: F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Bate Pages Item 1 1 38. Article from Nuclear Safety re: Potential 7/8/81 7
c Safety-Related Incidents in Nuclear Fuel-Reprocessing Plants by W. C. Perkins and W. S. Durant 139.
Routing Slip to Bob Kirkwood et. al. from 2/1/82 21 Carl Johnson re: Criteria Application 140.
Guidelines for Selecting Quality Assurance Undated 26 Activities and Specifying Quality Assurance Requirements for Plant Items and Services 141.
NSSS Approach to Equipment Qualification by 10/18-20/78 4
R. B. Miller and I. Garber 142.
Equipment Classification for Light Water 11/77 38 Reactor Power Plants 143. Memo for Members of P827 Working Group from 10/15/80 4
I. M. Jacobs re: Alternative to Table 4-3 in Current Draft of P827 144.
Routing Slip to Steve Richardson from John 11/3/80 7
Philips re: Appendix A and Appendix B 145.
Handwritten Note re: Changes Made Resulting Undated 31 from Cawley 146.
Routing Slip to Jim Peterson from J. T. Cawley 10/19/81 5
re: Entry for Regulatory Agenda 147.
Routing Slip to S. D. Richardson from 6/19/81 11 Joseph Cawley re: Federal Register Notice 148.
Letter to Demetrios Basdekas from Max W.
6/18/79 1
carbon re: Post-TMI NRC Actions 149.
Letter to All Operating Light Water Reactors 9/17/79 5
from H. R. Denton re: Potential Unreviewed Safety Question on Interaction Between Non-Safety Grade Systems and Safety Grade Systems l
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 2 1.
Memo for D. Ward from R. Major re: Project 1/27/81 4
Status Report for the ACRS Subcommittee Meeting on Plant Features Important to Sa fety 2.
Memo for L. S. Rubenstein from R. F. Fraley 3/24/81 1
re: ACRS Comments on "Important to Safety" Terminology 3.
Memo for David Ward from Richard Major re:
11/30/81 1
Standard Definitions for Commonly-Used Safety Classification Terms 4.
Letter to D. Ward from Paul Boehnert re:
12/16/80 2
Discussion of Subcommittee Activity S.
Memo for ACRS Members from R. F. Fraley re:
11/20/80 19 Definition of Plant Features "Important to Sa fe ty" 6.
FY 1982 Program Statement of Work - Classifica-Undated 2
tion of Systems Important to Safety 7.
Letter to NUPPSCO Members from Allen R.
3/27/81 22 Kasper re: Trial Use Guide (Draft 4) 8.
Letter to C. O. Coffer et. al. from D. A.
2/6/82 2
Campbell re: Definition of "Important to Safety" 9.
Letter to Stephen H. Hanauer from L. John 3/5/82 2
Cooper re: ANS Nuclear Power Plant Standards Committee Ad Hoc Committee on Important to Safety 10.
Letter to NUPPSCO Members from Marilyn D.
1/15/82 1
Weber re: Definitions of the Terms " Safety Related' and "Important to Safety" 11.
Memo for Karl Goller from Victor Stello, Jr.,
8/7/81 23 Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B
Re: F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages item 2 12.
Note to S. Richardson from M. W. Peranich re:
6/25/81 2
Draf t Commission Paper Dated June 9,1981 e
e
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 3 1.
Letter to Charles E. Williams from Richard H.
4/14/82 7
Vollmer re: INEL Technical Assistance to the Division of Engineering, NRR, NRC "Identifi-cation and Ranking of Plant Structures, Systems, and Components and Graded QA Requirements" 2.
Memo for M. Malsch from M. Kehnemuyi re: Extent 4/7/78 2
of Applicability of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 to Structures, Systems, and Components of Nuclear Power Plants 3.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to H. Denton et.
12/22/80 24 al. from S. D. Richardson re: Commission Paper for Final Comment and Office Concurrence 4.
Memo for George W. Knighton from James A.
10/8/81 8
Norberg re: Identification of Equipment Important to Safety 5.
Memo for The Commissioners from William J.
6/9/81 23 Dircks re: Clarification of Relationship Between 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A and Appendix B 6.
Memo for George W. Knighton from C. E. Rossi 12/16/80 3
re: Proposed Amendment to 10 CER Part 50 Appendix A to Clarify the Quality Assurance Program Requirements 7.
Changes Resulting from IE, OPA Undatdd 5
8.
Memo for G. A. Arlotto from Donald Skovholt 3/24/76 30 re: Prcposed Regulatory Guide on the Quality Assurance Program 9.
Meno for D. Vassallo et. alt. from Norman C.
Wll/79 2
fioseley re: Applicability of 10 CFR 50, Appendix A and Appendix B Requirements To All Safety Related Equipment.
- 10. Memo for J. L. Crews From A. D. Johnson re:
8/29/79 3
10 CFR 50, Appendix A and Appendix B Requirements
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 3
- 11. Memo for M. Kehnemuyt,
from Eric E. Jakel 7/25/78 2
re: Extent of Applicabili ty of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 To Structures, Systems And Components of fluclear Power Plants
- 12. Enclosure ELD Summary Outline Undated 1
s
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Paaes Item 4 1.
Control Systems and Plant Dynamics (Draft)
Undated 3
2.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to F. Rosa 3/11/81 13 et. al. from Jim Watt re: " Control Systems and Plant Dynamics" 3.
Memo for Thomas E. Marley from Andrew J.
9/24/81 9
Szukiewicz re: Activities Related to Task A-47, Safety Implications of Control Systems 4.
Letter to The Honorable Morris K. Udall from 4/10/81 2
Demetrois L. Basdekas re: Safety Implications of Control Systems and Dynamic Characteristics of Nuclear Power Plants 5.
Memo for Harold R. Denton from Robert B.
1/27/82 2
Minogue re: Request for Endorsement or Research Programs on the Safety Implications of Control Systems and Plant Electrical Systems Study 6
Memo for ACRS Members from M. W. Libarkin re:
11/25/80 11 Safety Implications of Control System Failures 7.
Memo for Karl Kniel from Faust Rosa re: Task 4/55/82 3
Action Plan for USI A-47, " Safety Implications of Control Systems" 8.
Memo for Thomas M. Novak from Themis P. Speis 4/15/82 7
re: NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9, Failure Mode Effects Analysis on the Integrated Control System 9.
Memo for Thomas Novak from Themis P. Speis re:
3/30/82 7
NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9, Failure Mode Effects Analysis on the Integrated Control System
- 10. Memo for John F. Stolz from Faust Rosa re:
4/8/82 5
Questions for the Record From Senator George J.
Mitchell to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- 11. Memo for Thomas Novak from Themis P. Speis re:
2/19/82 7
NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9, Failure Mode Effects Analysis on the Integrated Control System
Re:
F0!A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages l
Item 4 l
12.
Memo for Thomas Novak from Themis P. Speis re:
1/28/82 7
NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9., Failure Mode Effects Analysis on the Integrated Control System 13.
Note to R. Mattson from F. Rosa re: Close Out Uddated 3
6f NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9.
14.
Memo for Victor Stello from Harold R. Denton re:
12/21/81 2
OMB Clearance for NUREG-0737 15.
Letter to J. J. Mattimoe from John F. Stolz re:
1/18/82 6
NUREG-0737, Item II.K.2.9. - ICS Reliability Analysis 16.
Note to R. Mattson from C. E. Rossi re: Review 1/8/82 2
of TMI-l Hearing Board Partial Initial Decision Item II.H, " Integrated Control System" 17.
Memo for Robert A. Capra from Faust Rosa re:
12/2/81 10 Rancho Seco Appeal Board Memorandum and Order 18.
Memo for Robert A. Capra from Faust Rosa re:
Undated 6
Rancho Seco Appeal Board Memorandum and Order 19.
Note to Paul Fine from Faust Rosa re: 1981 9/lA/81 4
Annual Report 20.
Note to Roger Mattson from C. E. Rossi re:
4/16/81 2
Control System Failures 21.
Memo for George W. Knighton from Faust Roas 3/30/81 2
re: ORNL Proposal for the Study of " Control Systemssand Plant Dynamics" 22.
Memo for William Kerr from Faust Roas re:
3/20/81 9
Ongoing and Planned Activities Related to the Safety Implications of Control Systems 23.
Memo for ICSB Members from C. E. Rossi re:
2/12/81 4
Candidate Criteria for Control Sy:tems 24.
Memo for Robert L. Tedesco from Paul S. Check 3/6/81 49 re: Request for Additional Information from OL Applicants Regarding Four Instrumentation and Control Systems Concerns
Re: F01A-82-176 Appendix A Descr_iption Date Pages item 4 25.
Note to R. Mattson from C. E. Rossi re: Review 1/8/82 3
of TMI-l Hearing Board Partial Initial Decision Item II.H, " Integrated Control System"
- 26. Memo for Thor:as E. Murley from Andrew J.
9/24/81 9
Szukiewicz re: Activities Related to Task A-47, Safety Implications of Control Systems 27.
Memo for John F. Stolz from Robert A. Capra re:
12/11/81 15 Rancho Seco Appeal Board Memorandum and Order 28.
Memo for John F. Stolz from Robert A. Capra re:
12/4/81 14 Rancho Seco Appeal Borad Memorandum and Order 29.
Memo for John Stolz from Robert Capra re:
11/12/81 12 Affidavits in Response to ALAB-655
- 30. Memo for Faust Rosa from Gary G. Zech re: ACRS 3/9/81 1
Subcommittee Meeting 31.
Memo for William Kerr from Faust Rosa re:
3/20/81 9
Ongoing and Planned Activities Related to the Safety Implications of Control Systems 32.
Memo for Harold R. Denton from Stephen H.
12/15/80 2
Hanouer re: Effect of Interim Plant Power Deratings on Consequences Resulting from Control System Failures l
33.
Note to Tom Dunning et al. from Ernie Rossi 10/16/80 3
l re: Control System Failures Which Challenge Safety Systems t
34.
Note to Tom Dunning et. al. from Ernie Rossi 10/16/80 3
re: Control System Failures Which Challenge l
Safety Systems t
l 35.
Note to Tom Dunning et. al. from Ernie Rossi 10/16/80 3
re: Control System Failures Which Challenge Safety Systems
- 36. Memo for Harold R. Denton from Stephen H.
4/16 24 Hanauer re: Transmittal of Task Action Plan for USI A*47, " Safety Implications of Control l
Systems" l
l
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 4
- 37. Memo for G. W. Knighton from A. C. Thadani re:
5/22/81 2
Comments on ORNL Study Proposal " Control Systems and Plant Dynamics" 38.
Routing and Transmittal Slip to F. Rosa et. al.
3/11/81 12 from Jim Watt re: " Control Systems and Plant Dynamics
- 39. Memo for George Knighton from Themis P. Speis 4/81 1
Fe: Review of RES Proposal on " Control Systems and Plant Dynamics
- 40. Note to C. E. Rossi from J. T. Beard re:
3/2/81 3
Candidate Criteria for Control Systems 41.
Letter to Ivan W. Smith from Janes M. Cutchin 2/12/81 13 re: " Safety Implications of Control Systems and Plant Dynamics, and their Relevance to the TMI-l ASLB Hearing" 42.
Letter to The Honorable Morris K. Udall from 11/17/80 13 John F. Ahearne re: Update of Information Provided in Chairman's May 14 Response to Udall Letter 43.
Draft re: Nuclear Power Plant Regulations for 11/16/81 9
Instrumentation and Control Systems by C. Rossi 44.
Draft re: Philosophy on the Separation of 3/23/81 4
Protection and Control by C.E. Rossi
- 45. Draft re: Safety Implications of Control 2/16/81 6
Systems by C. Rossi
- 46. Task A Safety Implications of Control 10/27/81 16 Systems (Draft) 47.
Draf t Material on USI A-47 Undated 7
48.
Letter to Sheldon J. Wolfe et. al. from 11/27/81 63 Stephen M. Sohinki re: Staff Testimony
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 4
- 49. Draft Testimony on the Rancho Seco Nuclear Undated 4
Generating Station
- 50. Affidavit of Charles E. Rossi Before the Undated 4
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board.
(Draft)
- 51. Affidavit of Charles E. Rossi Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board 11/4/81 4
(Draft)
- 52. Note to Tcm Dunning et. al. from Ernie Rossi 10/16/80 5
re: " Effects of Control System Failures"
- 53. Memo for Commissioner Ahearne from Demetrios 10/25/79 2
Basdekas re: Safety Implications of Control Systems and Plant Dynamics
- 54. Memo for Commissioner Ahearne from Demetrios 9/4/79 4
Basdekas re: Safety Inplicatoons of Control Systems and Plant Dynamics
- 55. Memo for Max Carbon from Demetrios Basdekas re:
6/5/79 1
Post-TMI NRC Actions
Re: F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 5 1.
Routing Slip to K. Kniel et. al. from Hanauer 3/15/82 1
re: Safety Grade 2.
Memo for R. L. Tedesco from M. L. Ernst re:
1/5/82 2
Systems Interaction 3.
Memo for Raymond F. Fraley from Stephen H.
2/11/82 1
Hanauer re: Transmittal of Interim Guidance on Systems Interaction Analysis Methods 4.
Memo for Albert Schwencer from A. C. Thadant 3/19/82 25 re: Request for Additional Information and Clarification on Limerick Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) 5.
Memo for M. Bender from Richard Major re:
2/6/80 42 Background Material for 2/21/80 (Second Day)
Plant Arrangements Subcommittee Meeting 6.
Memo for David Okrent from Dorothy J. Zukor 5/21/80 10 re: Meeting with Sandia Labs to Discuss Further Technical Assistance on Task A-17 7.
Memo for M. Bender et. al. from D. E. Bessette 2/10/81 9
re: Project Status Report: ACRS San Onofre 2 and 3 Subcommittee Meeting as Part of the ACRS Review for an Operating License, Washington, DC, 2/18/81 8.
Memo for M. Bender et. al. from D. E. Bessette 2/26/81 8
re: Project Status Report: ACRS Subcommittee on San Onofre 2 and 3 Meeting of 3/11/81 in Washington, DC 9.
Memo for Gary Zech from D. E. Be ssette re:
2/27/81 7
Agenda for the ACRS Subcommittee on San Onofre 2 and 3 Meeting of 3/11/81 10.
Memo for D. Okrent et. al. from R. Savio re:
9/25/80 3
Status Report: 10/8/80 Meeting of the Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Subcommittee
Re: F0!A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 5
- 11. Memo for ACRS Members from R. Savio re: 10/11/80 10/1/80 1
Safety Philosophy, Technology, and Criteria Subcommittee Report 12.
Memo for ACRS Members from R. Savio re: Status 10/30/80 3
of the Review of the Diablo Canyon Systems Interaction Study 13.
Memo for Harold Denton from R. F. Fraley re:
8/12/81 1
Seismic-Induced and Other Interactions Between Non-Safety and Safety Systems 14.
Memo for ACRS Members from R. Savio re:
3/3/82 4
Possible System Interaction Study Topics 15.
Memo for D. Okrent et. al. from J. M.
2/12/82 78 Griesmeyer re: Status Summary for the Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria, 2/26/82
- 16. Memo for Harold R. Denton from Robert B.
4/8/82 8
Minogue re: Equipment Qualification - Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 17.
Memo for Thomas E. Murley from Frank H.
7/14/81 2
Rowsome re: The Approach to Systems Inter-actions in LWRS l
l l
Re:
F01A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Pages Item 6 1.
Memo for ICSB Members from C. E. Rossi re:
11/14/80 10 Status of IEEE P827, " Criteria for Determining Requirements for System Important to Safety" Following October 1980, NPEC Meeting 2.
Memo for George W. Knighton from Charles E.
9/30/80 4
Rossi re: Review of Draft IEEE Standard P-827,
" Criteria for Determining Requirements for Systems Important to Safety" 3.
Note for E. C. Wenzinger from E. W. Weiss 9/30/80 11 re: Need for NRC/IEEE Agreerent 4.
Memo for George W. Knighton from Charles E.
9/30/80 3
Rossi re: Review of Draft IEEE Standard P-827,
" Criteria for Determining Requirements for Systems Important to Safety" 5.
Draft Material Prepared by C. E. Rossi for Undated 9
P-827 6.
Memo for John Gallagher, Jr., et. al. from 1/9/80 20 I. M. Jacobs re: Rewrite of Section 4, P827, for Comment 7.
Memo to NPEC Members from J. M. Gallagher, Jr.,
10/20/80 42 re: Draft 3 of IEEE P827 Criteria for Determining Requirements for Systems Important to Safety 8.
Letter to J. M. Gallagher, Jr., from M. S.
10/3/80 5
Medeiros, Jr., re: " Criteria for Determining Requirements for Systems Important to Safety" 9.
Letter to Ad Hoc Working Group from J. M.
2/16/81 72 Gallagher, Jr., re: IEEE Trial Use Guide
- 10. Letter to J. M. Gallagher, Jr., from Eric W.
1/19/81 6
Weiss re: Identification and Characteristics of Ics Systems Important to Safety 11.
Draft Regulatory Guide 8/15/80 9
Re:
_ Appendix A Description _
Date Pages Item 6 12.
Materi Al Prepared by C. E. Rossi for IEEE P827 Undated 12 re: Testing, Calibration, and Maintenance 13.
Letter to H. K. Stolt from M. S. Medeiros, Jr.,
4/25/80 3
re: IEEE Standard Concerning Instrumntation j
Re:
F01 A-82-176 Appendix A Description Date Paaes Item 8 1.
Memo for Harold R. Denton from Carlyle Michelson 1/20/82 42 re: Safety Concern Associated with Reactor Vessel level Instrumentation in Boiling Water Reactors
APPENDIX B LIST OF ACRS DOCllMENTS IN THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM Item #2
- 1)
Plant Features Important to Safety Subcte Meeting, 2/3/81 j
(ACRS-1825/ACRST-0822)
- 2) 251st ACRS Meeting, March 12-14, 1981 (ACRST-1839/ACRST-0836)
Item #3 1)
Regulatory Guides Subcte Meeting, 8/6/80 (ACRS-1771/ACRST-0773)
Item #4 1)
Mark ltr 5/12/81 to Hendrie, Response to Inquiry Concerning the Safety Implications of Control Systems Failures (ACRSR-0928) 2)
Lipinski 1tr 2/6/81 re Safety Implications of Systems (CT-1316) 3)
Electrical Systems Subcte Meeting,1/23/81 (ACRS-1819/ACRST-0816) 4)
Electrical Systems Subcte Meeting, 3/25/81 (ACRS-1841/ACRST-0838) 5)
253rd ACRS fleeting, May 7-9, 1981 (ACRS-1858/ACRST-0856)
Item #5 1)
Plesset ltr 11/12/80 to Ahearne, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Station (ACRSR-0903) 2)
Mark ltr 3/17/81 to Hendrie, Report on San Onofre Nuclear Generativia Station Units 2 and 3 ( ACP,SR-0922) 3)
Ray memo 1/8/82 to Dircks, Systems Interactions
('ACRSR-0959) 4)
Shewmon ltr 3/9/82 to Palladino, Report on Systems Interactions Study for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 3 (ACRSR-0962)
Also applicable to Items 3 and 6 of Request.
Also applicable to Items 4 and 5 of Request.
NOTE:
Numbers in perentheses represent ACRS Document Identification Numbers.
For meetings, there are two numbers listed; the "ACRS "
numbers are assigned to Meeting " Minutes", and the l'ACRST " numbers are assigned to Meeting " Transcripts".
. W
-2 Item #5(cont'd) 5)
Plant Arrangements Subcte Meeting, 2/20-21/80 (ACRS-1719;
- Transcripts: PDR-ACRST-800220-8002280070 andPDR-ACRST-8002290094) 6)
Safety Philosophy, Technology & Criteria Subete Meetino, 9/3/80 (ACRS-1779/ACRST-0780) 7)
Safety Philosophy, Technology & Criteria Subcte tieeting,10/8/80 (ACRS-1784/ACRST-0786) 8)
San Onofre 2&3 Subcte fleeting, 2/18/81 (ACRS-1830/ACRST-0828) 9)
San Onofre 2&3 Subcte Meeting, 3/11/81 (ACRS-1838/ACRST-0835)
- 10) Safety Philosophy, Technology & Criteria Subcte Meeting, 2/26/82 (ACRST-1060A - only transcript available at this time)
- 11) 246th ACRS Meeting, October 9-11, 1980 (ACRS-1789/ACRST-0787A)
- 12) 247th ACRS Meeting, November 6-8, 1980 (ACRS-1794/ACRST-0793)
- 13) 256th ACRS Meeting, August 6-8, 1981 (ACRS-1888/ACRST-0993)
- 14) 263rd ACRS Meeting, March 4-6, 1982 (ACRST-1064 - only transcript available at this time)
Item #7 1)
Safety Philosophy, Technology & Criteria Subcte Meeting,1/28/81 (ACRS-1821/ACRST0818) 2)
Lipinski ltr 5/27/81 re General Design Criteria (CT-1345)
POR Identification Number