ML20054F254

Requests Util Address Encl Concerns on Loose Parts Monitoring Program in Final Design Rept

ML20054F254
Person / Time
Site:	Byron, Braidwood, River Bend, 05000000
Issue date:	06/10/1982
From:	Youngblood B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Delgeorge L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
References
NUDOCS 8206150411
Download: ML20054F254 (8)

Text

i DIST:

Document Control:(STN 50-454/455/456/457)

NRC~PDR

'JUN 101982 L PDR NSIC RA ACRS (16)

Docket Nos.: STN 50-454, STN 50-455 LB#1 Rdg.

MRushbrook and STN 50-456, STN 50-457 KKiper SChesnut Attorney, OELD Mr. Louis 0. De1 George OIE Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690

Subject:

Loose Parts Monitoring Program for Byron /Braidwood Stations In Amendment 37 to the Byron /Braidwood Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR),

Commonwealth Edison comitted to providing a comprehensive report on the loose parts monitoring program for the Byron /Braidwood Stations. This final design report would demonstrate that the loose parts monitoring rystem (LPMS) was substantially in conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.133, Revision 1,

" Loose-Parts Detection Program for the Primary System of Light-Water-Cooled Reactors," issued in May 1981.

Recently, the staff had our consultant, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL),

review the LPMS information submitted in the Byron /Braidwood FSAR. The attached table contains the results of this review and lists a number of areas where your submittal has provided insufficient information. The purpose of this letter is to request that Comonwealth Edison address these concerns in its final design report.

Including this information, along with the infor-mation already provided and the results of the preoperational tests, will ensure that a complete and comprehensive LPMS report is provided by Commonwealth Edison.

l If you should require any additional information please contact the project managers fir. Steve Chesnut for the Byron Station or Mr. Kenneth Kiper for the Braidwood Station.

l Sincerely, F0riginni cignoa by:

B. J. Youngblood B. J. Youngblood, Chief 8206150411 820610 Licensing Branch No. 1

[DRADOCK 05000454 Division of Licensing PDR cc: See next page d I's

, f),

....If...c DL:LBil' DL : LB #.1.%,..f...DL:

OFFICE)

..i.per BJN '

od

$URNOME>....$..h.9... 9..

.6/Jl/82 6/4282 6/9/82

../,.............

DOTE )

[ cenc ronu ais omaa sscu cao OFFIC'AL RECORD COPY uscro: ---mm

(

Mr. Louis 0. DelGeorge Driector of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767-Chicago, Illinois 60690 cc: Mr. William Kortier Mr. James G. Keppler Atomic Power Distribution U. S. NRC, Region III Uestinghouse Electric Corporation 799 Roosevelt Road Post Office Box 355 Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Pittsburgh, Pennsylavania 15230 Paul M. Murphy, Esq.

Isham, Lincoln & Beale One First National Plaza

~

42nd Floor Chicago, Illinois 60603 Mrs. Phillip B. Johnson 1907 Stratford Lan Rockford, Illinois 61107 Ms. Bridget Little Rorem Appleseed Coordinator 117 North Linden Street Essex, Illinois 60935 Dr. Bruce von Zellen Department of Biological Sciences Northern Illinois University DeKalb, Illinois 61107 Mr. Edward R. Crass Nuclea.r Safeguards and Licensing Division Sargent & Lundy Engineers 55 East Monroe Street Chicago, Illinois 60603 Myron Cherry, Esq.

' Cherry & Flynn Suite 3700 Thr'ee First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. William Fourney U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Byron / Resident Inspectors Office 4448 German Church Road Byron, Illinois 61010 Ms. Diane Chavez 602 Cak Street, Apt. #4 Rockford, Illinois 61108

Mr. Louis 0. DelGeorge Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 cc: Mr. William Kortier Atomic Power Distribution Westinghouse Electric Corporation Post Office Box 355 Pittsburgh, Peansylvania 15230 Paul M. Murphy, Esq.

Isham, Lincoln & Beale One First National Plaza 42nd Floor Chicago, Illinois. 60603 C. Allen Bock, Esq.

Post Office Box 342 Urbana, Illinois 61801 Thomas J. Gordon, Esq.

Waaler, Evans & Gordon 2503 S. Neil Champaign, Illinois 61820 Ms. Bridget Little Rorem Appleseed Coordinator 117 North Linden Street Essex, Illinois 60935 Mr. Edward R. Crass Nuclear Safeguards and Licensing ' Division Sargent & Lundy Engineers 55 East Monroe Street Chicago, Illinois 60603 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspectors Office RR#1, Box 79 Braceville, Illinois 60407 Mr. James G. Keppler U. S. NRC, Region III s

799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137

d DETAILED COMMEhTS We have reviewed the subject LPMS descriptions with regard to specific areas of.nonconformance to RG 1.133, and in accordance 91th your guidance, we are attempting to keep our responses concise by means of the accompanying table, which is keyed to Section C (Regulatory Position) of.

the RG.

In addition to the table, it may be appropriate to id'entify and

~

discuss some' particular areas of deficiency that we feel are especially important to the establishment of effective loose part detection programs.

i 1.

Periodic data review and long-term maintenance and calibration Our previous survey of LPMS implementati#n by the industry revealed that once a system is installed, calibrated.,and;placed in initial operation by the LPMS supplier it is typically neglected by the plant

~

operating personnel with regard to 'its continued operation, maintenance, i

assurance of calibrations, ard monitorind of output.

In this context, we observe that all,the submittals under review failed to state how the licensees plan to address these important areas, as defined in Sect. 3.a of RG 1.133.

2.

Alert logic and consistency with recommended detection sensitivi(g Two of the subm'ittals under review (Watts Bar and Midland) describe a method to reduce false alarms that is based cm self-adjusting threshold I

logic which " tracks" varying acoustic background noise at different plant operating conditions. Properly implemqnted, this feature is acceptable (see RG 1.133 Sects. 2.d and 3.a(2)(e)), but the proposed calibration and verification of required system sensitivity.at plant shutdown conditions i

implies to us that, under normal operating (higher background noi,se) conditions, the 0.5 f t-lb sensitivity requirement may not be met or, worse yet, the system may automatically be rendered insensitive to the detection of safety-significant loose parts without the knowledge of the plant operators.

3.

Reference to technical specification While RG 1.133 Sect. 4.f requires the SAR to make reference to a Tech Spec which defines a limiting condition.for operation with regard to inoperability of the LPMS, none of the submittals under review addressed this subject.

This again illustrates an apparent lack of commitment to a neaningful loose parts program on the part of the licensees.

i

] *

=

SUMMARY

OF REVIEW OF LPHS DESCRIPTIONS' Byron /

RG 1.133 Section Braidwood C.1 System Characteristics a.

Two sensors at each natural collection region C **

b.

Sensitivity of 0.5 ft-lb within 3 ft of sensor NI I

c.

Physical separation of instrumentation

~

channels NI I

d.

Automatic data acquisition,(tape recorder)

C e.

Autonatic comparison of signal to an alert level C

e i

f.

Periodic system operational verification and calibration h1 i

g.

Ability to function after seismic I

event C

h.

Quality of system co=ponents C

1.

Ease of repair to minimize radiation NI exposure i

l i

oo Symbols explained in KEY on final page L

Byron /

l

~

'RG 1.133 Section

~

Braidwood t

C.2. Establishing the Alert level a.

Logic to recognize LP in presence of i

noise i

I b.

Override of noise caused by control I

rod movement, etc.

i NI c.

Alert level a function of plant operating conditions NI d.

Cocpensation for different background noise on sennors C

C.3. Using the Data Acquisition Modes a.

Manual Mode (1) Pre-op tests to establish alert

~

level C

(2)

Startup and power operation s.

Submit alert level within 90 days af ter startup 1%

b.

Perform channel check each 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> NI l

c.

Listen to audio output each l

l 7 days C

l d.

Perform functional test each i

f NI 31 days l

1 j

l e.

Verify background noise each i

92 days I

l l

e

5 i

Byron /

RG 1.133 Section'

~

Braidwood (3) Verify channel calibration each 18 months NI b.

Auto =atic data recording when alert level is exceeded C

C.4. Content of Safety Analysis Reports a.

Sensor type, location, mounting,

{

and criteria for these I

I b.

Description of data acquisition, recording, and calibration I

c.

Major sources of extraneous noise C

d.

Quality assurance of data NI e.

Description of alert level determination and alert logic I

f.

Reference to technical specification NI i

l-g.

Description of diagnostic procedures I

F.

used to confi,rm loose part NI I

h.

Channel check procedures NI i

1.

Maintenance procedures to minimize radiation exposure NI

j. Training program C

k.

Verification that LPMS will function after a seis=ic event C

I i

1 l

l

\\

\\

i i

Watts Midland Byron /,

RG 1.133 Section Bar Braidwood C.5. Technical Specification for Loose-Part Detection System NA NA NA C.6. Notification of,a Loose Part NA NA NA-Conformance with RG 1.133 I

KEY: C Nonconformance with RG 1.133 NC Insufficient information provided I

No information provided NI Not applicable at.this time NA i

e o

I l

l 4

O

.