ML20234A926

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 4.2.3 & 4.2.4 Concerning Salem Atws.Response Requested within 45 Days of Ltr Receipt

ML20234A926
Person / Time
Site:	Byron, Braidwood, 05000000
Issue date:	09/09/1987
From:	Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Butterfield L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
References
GL-83-28, TAC-56284, TAC-63244, TAC-64023, TAC-64059, NUDOCS 8709180192
Download: ML20234A926 (5)

Text

-_ ___ -____

O

. l September 9, 1987 i

Distribution.  ;

Docket files 4 NRC/PDR 4 Docket Nos.: STN 50-454, STN 50-455, PDIII;2 r/f Plant file STN 50-456 and STN 50-457 GHolahan 0GC-Beth. -

sLLuther f-  ;

> SSands s., '3  !

Mr. L. D.- Butterfield, Jr. L01shan i

=

Nuclear Licensing Manager EJordan Commonwealth Edison Company JPartlow Post Office Box 767 l ACRS(10) 4

. Chicago, Illinois 60690 ,

l

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - ITEMS 442 M AND 4.2.4 0F GENERIC LETTER 83-28 (SALEM ATWS) (TAC N05.66284, 63244, 64023,64059) f Enclosed is a request for additional information concerning Items 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 of Generic. Letter 83-28 for the Byron and Braidwood Stations. Provide  ;

a response within 45 days of receipt of this letter. l The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements of this letter affect  !

fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required ,

under PL 96-511. f 1

/5 Daniel R. Muller, Director 1 I

Project Directorate III-2 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects

Enclosure:

As stated cc: See next page t j 0FC  : PDIII-2  : PDIII-2  : PDIII-2  : PDIII-2  :  :

---

__n01shan/ww NAME g _---_-____--_-:-: SSands MLLuthe

~  :

DMup-//_/q : ,

...--_:--___-------_--_:h/

DATE :38/ 3 /87 . 9 /87 : $/ 9 /87 :

--__-----__--:9___----____:_h/ "I /87 :  :

$(( M b P

f

l C' y,y ;; }

g l

o Mr. L. D. Butterfield, Jr.

- Commonwealth Edison Company Byron /Braidwood l

)

.cc'-

Mr. William'Kortier ' Dr. Bruce von Zellen Atomic Power Distribution Department of Biological Sciences  ;

- Westinghouse Electric Corporation Northern Illinois University '

Post Office Box 355 DeKalb, Illinois 61107 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Joseph Gallo, Esq. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Byron / Resident Inspectors Office  !

Isham, Lincoln & Beale

/1150 Connecticut Ave., N.W. 4448 German Church Road '

Suite.1100 Byron, Illinois 61010 Washington, D. C. 20036 Ms. Lorraine Creek C. Allen Bock, Esquire Rt. 1, Box 182 Post Office Box 342 Manteno, Illinois 60950 Urbana, Illinois 61801

~

Mrs. Phillip B. Johnson Regional Administrator 1907 Stratford Lane .

U. S. NRC, Region III Rockford,. Illinois 61107 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Douglass Cassel, Esq..

109 N. Dearborn Street' Ms. Bridget Little Rorem Suite 1300 y

. Appleseed. Coordinator Chicago, Illinois 60602 i

-117 North Linden Street 1 Essex, Illinois 60935 Ms. Pat Morrison I 5568 Thunderidge Drive Mr. Edward R. Crass Rockford, Illinois 61107 Nuclear Safeguards and Licensing David C. Thomas Esq.

Division Sargent & Lundy Engineers 77 S. Wacker Drive 55 East Monroe Street Chicago, Illinois 60601 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Elena Z. Kezelis, Esq.  ;

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Isham, Lincoln & Beale Resident Inspectors Office Three First National Plaza .

RR#1, Box 79 Suite 5200 Bracev111e, Illinois 60407 Chicago, Illinois 60602 l l

l

)

1 I

i

./ if I

'I t l . .

1 i

i REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION l ITEM _4.2 (PARTS 3&4)_OF GENERIC LETTER 83-28 i _ BYRON STATlDM, UNITS 1, 2 l BRA,JDWOOD stall.QN u UNITS 1, 2 ,,

J';

1 Item 4.2 of Generic Letter 83-28 i'equires licensees or applicants to descr'be I. ,

their preventive maintenance and surveillance program for ensuring reluble reactor trip breaker operation. Parts 3 ird 4 of Item 4.2 pertains to life testing of an acceptable sample size of (h breakers, cnd periodic replacement ofthebreakersorcomponents,:onsistentufjhdemonstratedlifecycles. The licensee submitted responses to Item 4.2 (Parts 3&4) by letters dated November 5, 1983; February 29,1984; June 1,1984; a'nd October 10, 1984.

The licensee referenced the Westinghouse Owngrs Group activities toward establish-ing the service life of the reactor trip breakers and components, and indicated that the life testing and replacement of the breakers and components would be based on the Westinghouse recommendations. /

Westinghouse has presented'the resu'ts of cyclic testing on the RTB DB-50 and i

DS-416inWCAP-10852and.1083r,gspectively. These reports address cyclic testing of the RTB trip attactrants.' Jheyneitheraddresslifequalification oftheRTBsnornoneyclicikfe"limitingorperformance-degradingphenomena(e.g., ,

aging) for the trip attachments. Therefore, WCAP-10852 and WCAP-10835 do not ,

constitute an acceptable response to the concern of the generic letter.

If it can be demonstrated that the qualified life of the RTB excecds the life of the plant, then the specific qualified life neqd not be identified. In a practical sense, the intent of the life testing tekuirement of the generic letter would be satisfied by demonstrating that the egalified life of the breaker (for the tripping function) exccedt the~ expccted use projected to the next refueling.

Cycle testing by the various"ouners groups, althodgh it does not consider the effects of aging, may provide evidence to support continued use of the RTBs for one additional refueling c;'cle, provided that the invivivial breaker has not shown a sign of degradation based on the licensee's Parametric Trend Monitoring

,' - r I ,

I

) .

l  !

/ /

)- (

-_ _ _ _ - - _ - _ - _ -_- __ 1

t

l. a

), '

i Program. In this approach, the actual qualified life is not specifically identi-

~

fied, but'is only demonstrated to be adequate.

j Ongoing life testing is an acceptable alternative to formal life testing for the 6; purpose of establishing a specific qualified life for RTBs. Ongoing life testing will demonstrate that the qualified life, though not specifically known, is longer  !

(in terms of cycles and time) than the integrated service that will be accumulated l through the next refueling interval. The description of an ongoing qualification j program should include the following:

9# (1) an estimate of the number of demands between refueling outages to which the RTB must respond, and the basis for the estimate. )

(2) a definition of relevant, end-of-life related failures (Note that random l failures occurring during the constant hazard rate portion of the " bathtub  ;

curve" (plot of failure rate vs. time) are not relevant to a life test).

The licensee should (a) identify the possible failure modes, (b) categorize ,

o' each failure mode as an end-of-life type or not, and (c) present a general

.e

- methodology for categorizing future failure modes that may not be included O in(a).

(3) the action to be taken upon any failure.

I, The staff finds that the licensee has not committed to a life testing program.

The licensee should qualify their breakers by (a) actual life testing of the breakers, including aging, on an acceptable sample size or (b) establishing an ongoing life testing program. If the first alternative is selected, the licensee b( should present the results of the life testing to the staff for review. If the second alternative is' selected, the licensee should describe their ongoing life l

. 1 testing program, including the three items identified above.

/

J

'l -

a'

n,-

73 .,

0..

F u- The licensee should also present for staff review a replacement program for the breaker and b'reaker components based on the'results of their life qualification program. For ongoing qualification, the licensee should describe how the ongoing.

qualification results will be'used to establish replacement cycles and times.

G e

J l

1

,