ML20070V605
| ML20070V605 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19262H527 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-42508, NUDOCS 8302170451 | |
| Download: ML20070V605 (5) | |
Text
'
~
~
^
],
.Cf
- 4 i.f.
4%
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT BY THE rii 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
-[
EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION BRANCH
'u FOR TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY d
DAVIS-BESSE
]
DOCKET NO. 50-346 J.;
.j ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF SAFETY-RELATED ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT
'!i l
INTRODUCTION General Jesign Criteria 1 and 4 specify that safety-related electrical y
equipment in nuclear facilities must be capable of performing its safety-t E
related function under environmental conditions associated with all
! Q
' ff normal, abnormal, and accident plant operation.
In order to ensure N
compliance with the criteria, the NRC staff required all licensees of
.t
,.2 operating reactors to submit a re-evaluation of the qualification of r$
safety-related electrical equipment which may be exposed to a harsh
,d environment.
/
BACKGROUND On February 8, 1979, the NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE) o h
issued to all licensees of operating plants (except those included in the w
systematic evaluation program (SEP)) IE Bulletin (IEB) 79-01, " Environ-l mental Qualification of Class IE Equipment." This Bulletin, together
~.g with IE Circular,78-08 (issued on May 31, 1978), required the licensees 1
to perform reviews to assess the adequacy of their environmental qualifica-s tion programs.
lG H..2 On January 14, 1980, NRC issued IE Bulletin 79-013 wh' h included the
.h@
00R guidelines and NUREG-0588 as attachments 4 and 5, respectively.
Subsequently, on May 23, 1980, Commission Memorandum and Order CLI-fJ-21 IV was issued and stat 9d the DDR guidelines and portions of NUREG-0588 form
-1 the requirements that licensees must meet regarding environmental M
d 8302170451 830208 4
"-"" PDR ADOCK 05000346 P
.n
n+
=-L,
?
e 4
y 1
nr 2-qualification of safety-related electrical equipment in order to sctisfy
.h those aspects of 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterion (GDC) 4.
'I Supplements to IEB 79-01B were issued for further clarification and definition of the staff's needs. These supplements were issued on February 29, September 30, and October 2'4, 1980.
r In addition, the staff issued orders dated August 29, 1980 (amended in
+. H.
ET September 1980) and October 24, 1980 to all licensees. The August order l.j;y required that the licensees provide a report, by November 1,1980, docu-
.o 7f menting the qualification of safety-related electrical equipment. The 3?
r s.d/
October order required the establishment of a central file location for q
the maintenance of al.1 equipment qualification records. The central
.d file was mandated to be established by December 1, 1980. The staff 1
id subsequently issued Safety Evaluation Reports (SERs) on enviromental 5
jj qualification of safety-related electrfcal equipment to licensees of
~
11 4
all operating plants in mid-1981. These SERs directed licensees to ll "either provide documentation of the missing qualification information which demonstrates that safety-related equipment meets the 00R Guide-
?J
{,
lines or NUREG-0588 requirements or commit to a corrective action
.a (re qualification, replacement (etc.))." Licensees were required to
- M
}.'
respond to NRC wfthin 90 days of receipt of the SER.
In response to
~
l 53 the staff SER issued June 5, 1981, the ifcensee submitted additional 04 5s information regarding the qualification of safety,related electrical 5"
,,[
equipment.
~J
- M h1
. f. >d
.-r sf
'.d
- e.* ; wwyv *-* **y
- =g r =*re y r--== * * *- ~~ ~ -- * ++ e -
.-~.
T.i L-
..--...2-
^
^
9 O
t
-r
.n ~
-?.
EVALUATION x.
1,:-
The, acceptability of the licensee's equipment environmental qualification
.I program was resolved for the Division of Engineering by the Franklin Research Center (FRC) as part of the NRR Technical Assistance Program wi in support of NRC operating reactor licensing actions. The consultant's review is documented in the report " Review of Licensees' Resolutions of
- ?
.{
Outstanding Issues from NRC Equipment Environmental Qualification Safety
..~;
' g Evaluation Reports," which is attached.
d We have reviewed the evaluation performed by our consultant contained in b
c' the enclosed Technical Evaluation Report (TER) and concur with its bases I'
and findings.
~
. i
~gi m
3
'.Q The staff has also reviewed the licensee's justification for centinued i h operation regarding each item of safety-related electrical equipment
-g:,
identified by the licensee as not being capable of meeting environmental qualification requirements for the service conditions intended.
k.]
CONCLUSIONS y;f-Based on the staff's review of the enclosed Technical Evaluation Reoort id and the licensee's justification for continued operation, the following
~:.u l ;
conclusions are made regarding the qualification of safety-related elec-
\\
- sN trical equipment.
lh 3.il-l u
- f;f
~
9 6
9
-'8 N
Y k E
,j, o
n
.?
. 4 -
~
~
Contined operation until completion of the licensee's environmental
.11 i
. qualification program has been determined to not present undue risk
- ,o j
to the public health and safety. Furthermore, the staff is continuing h
to review the licensee's environmental qualification program. If any additional qualification deficiencies were identified during the course c/
of this review, the licensee would be required to reverify the justifi-
. I f.$,
cation for continued operation. The staff will review this information J;
to ensure that continued operation until completion of the licensee's f.J environmental qualification program will not present undue risk to
~@
the public health and safety.
In this regard, it is requested that
- i75 the licensee do the following:
m s, A4 Resol.e any deficiencies identified in Appendix 0 of the FRC o
TER regarding justification for continued operation.
If as a c.7j result of resolving these deficiencies, the previous justifi-f, cation for continued operation is changed, provide within thirty
/3 (30) days of receipt of this SER the new justification for
~
.??
O continued operation regarding each affected item.
c i
a,
~]
The major qualification deficiencies that have been identified in the i
t.O m
anclosed FRC TER (Tables 4-1, 4-2, 4-3 and 4-4) must be resolved by h.
,2 the licensee.
Ifems requiring special ettention by the licensee are R5 j.9 summarized below:
1.,
e l g o
Submission of information within thirty (30) days for items l,j in NRC categories 1B, 2A and 2B for which justification for 3j continued operation was not previously submitted to NRC or m
.9 i]
- FRC, ia
'k w
,a l
.4,,. 7.y,, r- ---s~,y w n ~-.: w~v-~ r- -,
u
- - - - - ~ - - ~ - - - -
--v~~----------~-~w----
an
?':. y&' -
~*
m,.
4
-+<
~,.
.o 9] *
%-t
'd
.2
- V.
s C{
. D
.2 o
Resolution of concerns ident'ified in Section 5 of the 1'd 4]
FRC TER regarding the exemption of solenoid-operated i
).]
valves from qualification and the generic references q'
used as a basis of radiation and thermal aging quali-fication for many items.
The licensee must pr' ovide the plans for qualification or replacement of
- y the unqualified equipment and the schedule for accomplishing its proposed correction action in accordance with 10 CFR 50.49.
Fi?
.&. c if@"
PROPRIETARY REVIEW
~
.i,..
'?:1 Enclosed in the FRC Technical Evaluation Report (TER) are certain identi-6 fied pages on which the information is claimed to be proprietary.
' t.,
1 4
1 During the preparation of the enclosed TER, FRC used test reports and other documents supplied by the licensee that included material claimed -
L
-p to be proprietary by their owners and originators. NRC is now preparing
.p4'.
to publicly release the FRC TER and it is incumbent on the agency to
- q ;.
?
seek review of all claimed proprietary material. As such, the licensee
.s.
is requested to review the enclosed TER with their owner or originator W
and notify NRR within seven (7) days of receipt of this SER whether
.y
.d any portions of the identified pages still require proprietary 1 :+[
protection.
If so, the licensee must clearly identify this infor-n.$..
l.3, mation and the specific rationale and justification for the protection
@an from public disclosure, detailed in a written response within twenty (20) days of receipt of this SER. The level of specificity necessary sd y
for such continued protection should be consistent with the criteria wg enumerated'in 10 CFR 2.790(b) of the Commission's regulations.
ny b.l y... w~.m. m:.s.z y :--- -~ ~ -
---r---
u-
.---~~n-
-me 4
.