ML20213D850
| ML20213D850 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1981 |
| From: | Johnston W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0408, CON-WNP-408 NUDOCS 8110290619 | |
| Download: ML20213D850 (4) | |
Text
A5 u_ Gid, l-k c
OcM
?uif DCT 21 1981 e y --) '(.-]
Docket No. 50-397 MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing FROM:
William V. Johnston, Assistant Director gmrs Materials & Qualifications Engineeripg Nib \\
Division of Engineering Y
(j[g l$h 'C p
O
SUBJECT:
WASHINGTON NUCLEAR PROJECT 2 iLU SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT 3
00T22198h e D
Plant Name: Washington Nuclear Project 2 EIEN" b Docket No.: 50-397
\\a
'M Licensing Stage: OL Q n g W.s 9 /
s Responsible Branch: Licensing Branch No. 2 Responsible Project Manager:
R. Auluck Required Completion Date: October 19, 1981 Review Status: Continuing The enclosed Safety Evaluation Report (SER) was prepared by DE:MQE, Equip-ment Qualification Branch. The SER input covers the following items:
- 1) Pump and Valve Operability Assurance Program.
- 2) Seismic and Dynamic Qualification of Seismic Category I Mechanical and Electrical Equipment.
The Equipment Qualification Branch has completed its review of the applicant's FSAR Sections 3.9.3.2 for pump and valve operability assurance and 3.9.2 and 3.10 for equipment seismic and dynamic qualification. We find that the applicant has in general defined the programs for the above mentioned two items. However, it is not possible to determine the adequacy of the overall programs without a confirmatory on-site audit.
We plan to conduct the pump and valve operability assurance audit concurrent with the SORT audit. He believe such scheduling should minimize manpower and scheduling conflicts for the applicant, the staff, and out Technical Assistance Contractors.
The branch reviewer for item 1 is R. LaGrange. The branch reviewer for item 2 is T_. Y. Chang.
P
~
/
W,,
n 8110290619 011021
)
- S-ADOCLO1900gL/
William V. Johnston, Assistant Director Materials & Qual 4fication Engineering E0B/DE pg EQB/DE g6L EQB/U h0"Eh/
"M&QE/AD/gE) v EnclosureTYChang,
RLaGrange GBage 14 /
ZRosztogry' WJohnston As stated 10/ /(, /81 10/ ((o /81 10//g
/81 10/ y /81 10/30/81 cc:
(Seenextpage)
~
\\
7 j.*r f~J Robert L. Tedesco OCT 21 ~1961 i,
'I cc:
R. Vollmer Z. Rosztoczy A. Schwencer R. Auluck
~
q G. Bagchi M. Haughey R. LaGrange A. Lee R. Riggs R; Wright T. Y. Chang J. N. Singh. INEL M. Reich, BNL
~
~.
c(
l
,m:r: 'EQB/DE EQB/DE
!EQB/DE EQB/DE M&QE/AD/,DE-
/
.TYChang:ao PlaGrange.
GBagchi.
ZRosztoczy.
'WJohnston l
", 101
, /81'-15
/81 10/_
/8'1 10/
/81 10/
. /81 '
/
l
\\
'l
' ~
\\
=
~.*f,'l 1:.
l
^
t
e, Equipment Qualification Branch Input for Safety Evaluation Report WNP-2 3.9.3.2 Pump and Valve Operability Assurance The staff has reviewed the applicant's' pump and valve operability assurance program as discussed in Section 3.9.3.2 of the FSAR and compared this information with Section 3.9.3 of the Standard Review Plan. Based on our review, the applicant has provided information to define how active pumps and valves are generally qualified With respect to operability.
However, and in particular, for those components where quali-fication and/or operability assurance is by analysis alone, some question remains as tc the confidence level assured by this methodology. The necessity for additional component testing is being considered and can not be established without an inspection at the plant site. Therefore, for the staff to determine the adequacy of the implementation of the applicant's pump and valve operability assurance program, an on-site audit of the equipment and supporting documentation is required.
The on-site audit will include a plant inspection to observe the as-built configuration and installation of the equipment. Also during the audit the staff will review qualifying documentation, eg., test reports, and analysis, which are described in the applicants program. Thus our overall review includes an FSAR review and an on-site audit of the equipment.
Both phases of the staff review must be determined acceptable to arrive at a favorable conclusion on the applicant's overall pump and valve operability assurance program.
The applicant had been requested to provide information on the completion status of the equipment documentation, and on-site installation of the equipment.
Before the audit is conducted, 85 to 90 percent completion should be attained for both the equipment documentation and the on-site installation of the equipment.
Once the applicant has indicated that his work is substantially complete, the staff will conduct an on-site audit shortly thereafter.
l l
Because of the limited number of equipment that can be audited within a reasonable time, the audit results must provide a high degree of confidence that the implementation of the applicant's program is acceptable.
l
?
3.10 Seismic and Dynamic Qualification of Seismic Category I Mechanical and Electrical Equipment Our evaluation of the adequacy of the applicant's program for quali-ficatien of electrical and mechanical equipment important to safety for seismic and dynamic loads consists of 11) a determination of the acceptability of the procedures used, standards followed, and the <.
completeness of the program in general, and (2) an onsite audit of selected equipment items to develop the basis for the staff judgment on the completeness and adequacy of the implementation of the entire seismic and dynamic qualification program.
The Seismic Qualification Review Team (SQRT), wnich consists of reviewers'from'the Equipment Qualification Brar(ch (EQB) and con-sultants from Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), has reviewed the methodology and procedure of equipment' seismic and dynamic qualification program contained in the pertinent FSAR Sections 3.7, 3.9.2, 3.9.3, 3.10 and Appendices 3.10A, B, C.
The SQRT has concluded that, with one important exception, the information contained in the FSAR does meet the intent of the current licensing criteria as described in IEEE 344-1975, Regulatory Guides 1.92 and 1.100, and the Standard Review Plan Sections 3.9.2 and 3.10.
The exception being that tne effect of hydrodynamic vibratory loads (associated with either safety relief valve discharge or LOCA blow-down into the suppression pool), on equipment liable to experience this kind of excitation, is not addressed in the applicant's FSAR.
The applicant is required to consider the hydrodynamic loading effect on equipment susceptible to this kind of loading in the seismic and dynamic qualification program. Furthermore, IEEE Std 344-1975 covers the seismic qualification aspects; however, the aging and test sequence aspects of the equipment qualification -
must be in accordance witn the requirements of IEEE Std 323-1974.
In our communication with the applicant, we indicated that d substantial portion (85%-90%) of the equipment must be qualified, documented in an auditable manner, and installed.onsite before an onsite audit by the staff can be performed. We also indicated to the applicant the type of infor-mation necessary for us to select the equipment items for a detailed onsite review. Once the applicant has indicated that his work is substantially t
l complete the staff will conduct an onsite audit shortly thereafter. We shall report the results of our audit in a future supplement to our SER.
Our review of this area will be complete after the applicant has demon-l strated the adequacy of his qualification program through a satisfactorily audit.
l l
l j
3 m
I DQTRIBUT"0N
@LReading ntrA1.ElesWI l
OCTOBER 2 1 1981
~
- RLTedesco I
k 14EMORANDU!i FOR: Edward Ketchen, Hearing Division Office of the Executive Legal Director
.gg)
William Paton, Hearing Division A
" 'c -
Office of the Executive Legal Director <
.[-
'.D, Daniel Swanson, Hearing Division E.
b Office of the Executive Legal Director
" ' v, m,.j.$,
- '~
u FROM:
Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director s,
for Licensing
-, [g)f.'
Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
EXPRESSED INTEREST BY YAVAMAR INDIAN NATI0t:
I received a telecon from Erlene Reber of the Yakamar Indian Nation requesting that her tribe be given full rights in the proceedings dealing with the WNP-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 projects.
I told her that I would contact the attornies on these cases and request that they contact her.
I had followed a similar approach on Skagit with R. Black. Ms. Reber's number is (509)865-5121 X372.
Nginal Signed by W 2. Tedesco Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing l
Division of Licensing l
cc:
E. Christenbury J. Scinto R. Black R. Auluck L. Wheeler R. Hernan w*
7A C i a Awai ? 811021 W
ADOCK 05000397 9
..DL ;,(,,,,,,,, l,,,
,,l,,,,,
oz.c su,.M RLIedesca:.lbl.............
oan p...l.0/,,,,L81,,
unc roau sis oa-soi nneu oaa OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usm iai-33-m
- - -