ML20236T561
| ML20236T561 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/18/1987 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236P833 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8712010365 | |
| Download: ML20236T561 (7) | |
Text
-___ _____ _ _ _ _ _ - _
ENCLOSURE 1
[ p a8cog UNITED STATES f,,
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+- y g-WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 '
j s-l
%,=A /
l
...+
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1-DOCKET NO. 50-289 l
GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.1 EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION-PROGRAMS FOR ALL SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS a
si
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Generic Letter 83-28 was' issued by the NRC on. July. 8,1983 to indicate actions q
to be taken by licensees and applicants based on the generic implications of j
the Salem ATWS events.
Item 2.2.1 of that letter' states that-licensees and applicants shall describe in considerable detail their program for classifying all safety-related components other than RTS components as safety-related on plant documents and in information handling systems that are used to control-plant activities that may affect these components. Specifically, the licensee /
q applicant's submittal was required to contain information describing (1) The criteric used to identify these components as safety-related;'(2) the information handling system which identifies the components as safety-related; (3) the manner in which station personnel use this information handing system j
to control activities affecting these components; (4) management controls that are used to verify that the infomation handling system is prepared, maintained,
)
validated, and used in ac.cordance with approved procedures; and (5) design verification and qualification testing requirements that are part of the-specifications for procurement of safety-related components.
i The licensee for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 submitted responses to Generic Letter 63-28. Item 2.2.1 in submittals dated November 8, 1983, August 5, 1985 and May 29, 1987. We have evaluated these responsesand find that they are acceptable.
r h
P
___---_a
1 I
. j l
i.
2.0 EVALUATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 1
In these sections the licensee's responses te the program and each of five sub-I items are individually evaluated against guidelines developed by the staff and l
conclusions are drawn regarding their individual and collective acceptability.
(
- 1. Identification Criteria i
Guideline: The licensee's response should describe the criteria used to j
identify safety-related equipr6ent and components.
(Item 2.2.1.1)
Evaluation:
s The licensee's response states that the criteria for identifying components as safety-related within systems are described in General Public Utilities i
Nuclear (GPUN) Technical Functions Procedure EP-011
- Quality Classification l
List (QCL).* The quality classification of systems, structures and major components are listed in Technical Functions Standard ES-011
- Methodology and Content of GPUN Quality classification List." These procedures provide the means for maintaining the quality classification of the QCL. The criteria and procedures were not included in the response.
==
Conclusion:==
We find the licensee's description for the criteria used to identify safety-related equipment and components satisfies the staff's concern and are acceptable.
- 2. Information Handlinc System Guideline: The licensee's response should confirm that the equipment classification program includes an information handling system that is used to identify safety-related equipment and components. Approved procedures which govern its development, maintenance, and validation should exist.
(Item 2.2.1.2) 1
d' s.;
w.
p Evaluation:
The licensee's response states that GPUN Technical Functions Procedure ES-011
" Methodology and Control of GPUN Quality Classification List" establishes the method for using the Quality Classification List (QCL) to assign quality classifications to GPUN staticn structures, systems, components, and parts.
It also assigns responsibilities for interpreting and maintaining the procedure and the contained QCL must be-used by all GPUN personnel to specify the. quality classification.
==
Conclusion:==
We conclude that this description of the licensee's infomation handling system shows that it meets the. staff requirement and is acceptable.
- 3. Use of Information Handling System Guideline: The licensee response should confirm that their equipment
~
classification program includes criteria and procedures which govern the use of the information handling system to determine that an activity is safety-related and that safety-related procedures for maintenance, surveillance, parts replacement and other activities defined in the introduction to 10CFR50, Appendix B, are applied to safety related components.
(Item 2.2.1.3)
Evaluation:
The licensee's response states that the GPUN Operational Quality Assurance Plan requires that safety-related activities be prescribed by documented procedures and that these activities be accomplished in accordance with the procedures.
In addition, measures are established to control and coordinate the approval and issuance of procedures which prescribe safety-related activities. These procedures include operating and special orders, operating
e-4 procedures, test procedures, equipment and material control procedures, maintenance or modifications procedures and refueling. procedures. These procedures are available on-site for review,
==
Conclusion:==
We find the licensee's response. describes a program that is acceptable.
- 4. Management Controls Guideline: The licensee / applicant should confirm that management controls.
used to verify that the procedures for preparation, validation, and routine-utilization of the information handling system have been and are being l
followed.
(Item 2.2.1.4)
Evaluation:
The licensee's response provides a detailed description of the management controls and application as found in the approved GPUN Operational Quality
~
Assurance Plan. The quality assurance program consists of a three-level approach to assure satisfactory and complete implementation of the program commensurate with its requirements for safety and performance. Each level described the activities, the organizations responsible for performing the activities, the documentation required, the establishment of procedures and instructions, etc. Emphasis is also placed on lines of internal and external communications for obtaining the necessary management direction.
==
Conclusion:==
We conclude that this response addresses the staff's concerns and is acceptable.
_m.--_____
_. _ _ _..___m,.___a
v.
- 4 l
. j
- 5.-
' i
- 5. Design Verification and Procurement
- i Guideline: The licensee /spplicant's response should document that past usage demonstrates that appropriate design verification and ouclification j
testing is specified for the procurement of safety-related. components'and:
parts. The specifications should include qualification testing for expected
{
safety service conditions and provide: support for licensee's receipt of testing documentation which supports the limits of life recommended by the supplier.
If such documentation is not available, confirmation that the present program meets these requirements should be provided.
(Item 2.2.1.5) l Evaluation:
The licensee's response provided a' description of the activities associated with the procurement of safety-related equipnent and components, and identified the associated control procedures.
)
Ccnclusion:
y We find the licensee's procedures meet the staff requirements for this item and are acceptable.
1
'l
- 6. "Important To Safety" Components i
Guideline: Generic letter 83-28 states that licensee / applicant equipment classification programs should include (in addition to the safety-related y
l components) a broader class of components designated as "Important to Safety." However, since the generic letter does not require' licensee /
l applicant to furnish this information as part of their response, staff review of this sub-item will not be performed..(Item 2.2.1.6) l t
wt
,,a q
R@
u j' _7 tb
(
3 4
- 7. Program J
Guideline:
Licensees / applicants should confirm that an equipment. classification program l
exists which prevides assurance that all safety-related components are designated as safety-related on plant documents such es drawings, procedures,.
system descriptions, test and maintenance' instructions, operating procedures, and information handling systems so that personnel who perform activities that affect such safety-related components are aware that they are working on safety-related components and are guided by safety-related procedures and' constraints.
(Item 2.2.1)
Evaluation:
q The licensee's response to these requirements was contained in submittals-dated November 8, 1983, August 5, 1985 and May 29, 1987. These submittals describe the licensee's program for identifying and. classifying safety-j related equipment and components which meets the staff requirements as l
indicated in the precedir.g sub-item evaluations.
j I
==
Conclusion:==
We conclude that the licensee's program addresses the staff concerns regarding equipment and component classification and is acceptable.
j i
o I
(-
E 1
7.:
l
.l I
3.0 REFERENCES
1.
NRC Letter, D. G. Eisenhut to all Licensees of Operating Reactors, Applicants for Operating License, and Holders of Construction Permits, " Required Actions Based on Generic' Implications of Salem ATWS Events (Generic Letter 83-28)," July 8, 1983.-
2.
GPU Nuclear Corporation letter, H. D. Hukill to D. G. Eisenhut, NRC, November 8,1983,-(5211-83-330).
]
.f 3.
GPU Nuclear Corporation letter, R. F. Wilson to J. F. Stolz, NRC, l
August 5, 1985, (5211-85-2132) RFW-0570.
4.
GPU Nuclear Corporation letter, H. D. Hukill to'NRC, liay 29, 1987 (5211-87-2099).
Principal Contributor:
C. Kim Dated: November 18, 1987 1
J I
l l
l m-__
j