ML20211B345
| ML20211B345 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/03/1986 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Fulton J BOSTON EDISON CO., BWR OWNERS GROUP |
| References | |
| IEB-85-003, IEB-85-3, IEIN-84-10, NUDOCS 8606110604 | |
| Download: ML20211B345 (7) | |
Text
_ _ _ -
8
/ o g
o UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 y
\...../ O3 gg Mr. J. M. Fulton, Chairman BWR Owners' Group c/o Boston Edison Company 25 Braintree Hill Office Park Braintree, Massachusetts 02184
Dear Mr. Fulton:
Your letter of April 29, 1986, requesteo an extension of the six-month period specified for the initial response to IE Bulletin 85-03, " Motor-0perated Valve Cocinon Mode Failures During Plant Transients Due to Improper Switch Settings.
Although no revised date was specified, it would be later than the September 1, 1986 target date for completion of the generic work to be performed by the owners' group.
Based on telephone conversations between members of the owners' group and E. L. Jordan of my staff, it is our understanding that the primary reason for this requested extension is to permit the owners' group to develop a consistent basis for, and values of, maximum valve differential pressure to be used by- the various utilities. We support the owners' group involvement in such issues.
However, we also want to point out that relatively few valves in a BWR are subject to the bulletin actions and that the schedule specified in the bulletin allowed six months to develop the test program for these valves. Actual valve testing is required to be completed within two years of the date of the bulle-tin. When IE Bulletin 85-03 was issued, we felt this was a reasonable and attainable schedule, and still feel this is the case. As discussed below we are granting the requested extension to the date for the initial response required by the bulletin. However, we fully expect the overall program be completed by November 15, 1987 as specified in the bulletin.
As discussed during the telephone call of May 28, we will accept the requested extension to part e. of the bulletin provided:
(1) The staff is kept fully apprised of the work of the owners' group so that it can make an immediate, response to your September 1, 1986 response.
(2) The individual utilities within the owners' group seeking to take advan-tage of this extension will notify us by letter immediately and also commit to these conditions:
(a) The individual utilities within the owners' group will make their formal submittal of the initial response (item e. of the bulletin) no later than October 1, 1986.
(b) The valve testing (items b. through d. of the bulletin) and submittal of the final response (item f. of the bulletin) will be in accordance with the schedule specified in the bulletin unless specific approval to the contrary is requested in the October 1, 1986 response. Any request for an extension must be thoroughly justified.
8606110604 860603 PDR TOPRP EMVGENE C PDR
l d
)
l J. M. Fulton _. l l
Your letter implied that the problem addressed by the bulletin was a PWR problem, not a BWR one. While the problem was brought to light by the event at a PWR, the problem of incorrectly set motor-operator switches is not unique to one type of reactor. Rather, recent studies of valve problems performed by the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data has detected little or no signift; ant difference in the failure rates based on reactor type. In fact, it should be noted that IE Information Notice 84-10 " Motor-0perated Valve Torque Switches Set Below the Manufacturer's Recommended Value," was prompted by an LER submitted by the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, a BWR.
Sincerely, Original SMned BD lames M. Taybr James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Distribution:
JMTaylor RHVollmer ELJordan SASchwartz RLBaer AWDromerick '
RJKiessel JGPartlow BKGrimes GGZech RWStarostecki, RI SDEbneter, RI RDWalker, RII AFGibson, RII CENorelius, RIII CPaperiello, RIII EJohnson, RIV DFKirsch, RV DPAllison E;.HABailey
.DCSL.]
DEPER R/F EGCB R/F RJKiessel R/F @g g PDR fc,.
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES D: :IE J ylor RH 1mer O! '786 /86 T
- DEPER:IE *DEPER:IE *PSB:IE *DEPER:IE E E RJKiessel AWDromerick DGable RLBaer Sg artz *h or an 05/29/86 05/29/86 05/29/86 05/29/86 05%/86 / 2 /86 pCW
t .
J. M. Fulton Your letter implied that the problem addressed by the bulletin was a PWR problem, not a BWR one. While the problem was brought to light by the event at a PWR, the problem of incorrectly set motor-operator switches is not unique to one type of reactor. Rather, recent studies of valve problems performed by the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data has detected little or no significant difference in the failure rates based on reactor type. In fact, it should be noted that IE Information Notice 84-10, " Motor-0perated Valve Torque Switches Set Below the Manufacturer's Recommended Value," was prompted by an LER submitted by the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, a BWR.
Sincerely, James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Distribution:
JMTaylor RHVollmer ELJordan SASchwartz RLBaer AWDromerick RJKiessel JGPartlow BKGrimes GGZech RWStarostecki, RI )(
Spdeter,RI RDWalker, RII AFGibson, RII CENore1[us,RIII CPaperiU10, RIII-EJohnson, RIV ,h(
DFKirsch, RV DPAllison HABailey DCS DEPER R/F EGCB R/F
~
Kiessel R/F
('T> ft D:IE DD:IE JMTaylor RHVollmer 7 05/ /86 05/ /86
- DEPER:IE *DEPER:IE *PSB:IE DEP R:IE DD:DEPER:1E D:DEPER:IE RJKiessel AWDromerick DGable RLBaer SASchwartz ELJordan 05/29/86 05/29/86 05/29/86 05/2f/86 05/ /86 05/ /86
s \
l J. M. Fulton with the schedule specified in the bulletin unless specific approval to the contrary is requested in the October 1, 1986, response. Any l request for an extension must be thoroughly justified.
Your letter implied that the problem addressed by the bulletin was a PWR problem, not a BWR one. While the problem was brought to light by the event at a PWR, the problem of incorrectly set motor operator switches is not unique to one type of reactor. Rather, recent studies of valve problems performed by the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data has detected little or no significant difference in the failure rates based on reactor type. In fact, it should be noted that IE Information Notice 84-10. " Motor-0perated Valve Torque Switches Set Below the Manufacturer's Recommended Value," was prompted by an LER submitted by the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, a BWR.
Sincerely, James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Distribution:
RHVollmer ELJordan SASchwartz RLBaer AWDromerick RJKiessel JGPartlow BKGrimes GGZech RWStarostecki, RI SBEneter, RI RDWalker, RII AFGibson, RII CENorelius, RIII CPaperiallo, RIII EJohnson, RIV DFKirsch, RV DPAllison HABailey DCS DEPER R/F EGCB R/F Kiessel R/F D:IE JMTaylor 05/ /86 DEPER:IE PSB:I DD:DEPER:IE D:DEPER:IE DD:IE
.RJKiesseP rick DGable@gg[.DEPER:IE RLBaer SASchwartz ELJordan RHVollmer c /86 05/27/86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/af/86
J. M. Fulton it should be noted that IE Information Notice 84-10 " Motor-0perated Valve Torque Switches Set Below the Manufacturer's Recommended Value," was prompted by an LER submitted by the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, a BWR.
I Sincerely, James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Distribution:
RHVollmer ELJordan SASchwartz RLBaer AWDromerick RJKiessel JGPartlow fg RidSNr'06 N Wi> M TEM riey RI I Nbu6 D JNGr c , RII f,M Id@l MAN p
>M2 RM t R 8 : OW , )M RM 11o,'RI 0% IborelSud, J artin, RV C p7g epjg)l p, M N O Y OMrS DCS $fiypc$1y SS DEPER R/F EGCB R/F Kiessel R/F
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE D:IE JMTaylor 05/ /86
- DEPER:IE *DEPER:IE *DEPER:IE *DD:DEPER:IE *D:DEPER:IE DD- 1 RJKiessel AWDromerick RLBaer SASchwartz ELJordan R er 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 0 g 86 8
w jfcPsem;MMccw"bd f
l* .
J. M. Fulton difference in the failure rates based on reactor type. In fact, it should be l noted that IE Information Notice 84-10, " Motor-0perated Valve Torque Switches '
. Set Below the Manufacturer's Recommended Value," was prompted by an LER submit-ted by the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, a BWR.
Sincerely, Richard H. Vollmer, Deputy Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Distribution:
RHVollmer ELJordan SASchwartz
. RLBaer AWDromerick RJKiessel JGPartlow BKGrimes GGZech
. TEMurley, RI
. JNGrace, RII JGKeppler, RIII RDMartin, RIV JBMartin, RVg - g n 6 d I6 gy 4
DPAllison i HABailey DCS-DEPER R/F EGCB R/F i
Kiessel R/F bT\
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE g\
- DEPER:IE *DEPER:IE *DEPER:IE *DD:DEPER:IE ER:IE DD:IE RJKiessel AWDromerick RLBaer SASchwartz ELJordan RHVollmer 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05/ /86 05//J786 05/ /86 1
4
~w- ------,,-,w.,-, - - - ew--, . . . - - - y-- , - - - , . , . - , - , - , .
a . ,.
J. M. Fulton difference in the failure rates based on reactor type. In fact, it should be noted that IE Information Notice 84-10. " Motor-0perated Valve T:rque Switches Set Below the Manufacturer's Recommended Value," was prompted by an LER submit-ted by the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, a BWR.
Sincerely, Richard H. Vollmer, Deputy Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Technical
Contact:
Richard J. Kiessel (301)492-8119 Distribution:
RHVollmer ELJordan SASchwartz RLBaer AWDromerick RJKiessel JGPartlow BKGrimes GGZech TEMurley, RI JNGrace, RII JGKeppler, RIII RDMartin, RIV JBMartin, RV DPAllison 4ABailey DCS DEPER R/F EGCB R/F Kiessel R/F J
h@ .
DELER:IF DJP,EL,IEM DEPER:IE . .PER:IE D:DE :IE DD:IE RJKiessel $ r Me Wck RLBaer A chpartz ELJordan RHVollmer 05//g/86 05pg86 05/ /86 05/l /86 05/ /86 05//{/86
'