View source for W3P84-0096, Supplements Addl Info Provided in Justifying Use of Analysis in Resolving Aging & Operability Issue to Qualify Rosemount 1153A Transmitter Use at Facility,Per Sser 5

{{Adams
| number = ML20081A790
| issue date = 03/01/1984
| title = Supplements Addl Info Provided in Justifying Use of Analysis in Resolving Aging & Operability Issue to Qualify Rosemount 1153A Transmitter Use at Facility,Per Sser 5
| author name = Cook K
| author affiliation = LOUISIANA POWER &amp; LIGHT CO.
| addressee name = Knighton G
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION (NRR)
| docket = 05000382
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| document report number = W3P84-0096, W3P84-96, NUDOCS 8403060306
| title reference date = 08-05-1983
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| page count = 2
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:e 9 142 DEL ARONDE STREET P O W E H & L 1 G 14 T! p o Box soos . NEW ORLEANS. LOUISIANA 70174. (504) 366-2345
     = ssa w                             Macch 1, 1984 W3P84-0096 3-A20.16 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regvalation Attention: Mr. G.W. Knighton, Chief Licencing Branch No. 3 Division af Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

==SUBJECT:==
Waterford 3 SES Decket No. 50-382 Environmental Qualification

==REFERENCE:==
: 1) LP&L Letter W3P83-1853 dated 8/5/83

==Dear Sir:==

SSER 5 required that LP&L provide additional information to justify the use of analysis in resolving the aging and operability issue to qualify the Rosemount 1153A transmitter in use at Waterford 3, particularly in light of the transmitter perfortrance anomalies observed in a test conducted by Westinghouse. The purpose of this letter is to summarize and expand upon the additional information provided by Reference 1.
Demonstration of qualification by test af the Rosemount 1153A transmitter has been discussed by Reference 1, which provided the results of an evaluation of the 1153A tests conducted by Westinghouse. This evaluation supports a minimum qualification lifetime of 6.5 years inside containment and 19.3 years outside containment.       In addition, correspondence obtained from Rosemount indicates that their ll53A and 1153B series transmitters "are based on the same design" and that their major differences are only in the area of qualification and test level and in Rosemount's method of manufacturing qualified equipment. The 1153A trans-
    ''r e r  is qualified to 1EEE 323-1.971; the 1153B transmitter is qualified to 323-1974 and has been thermally aged to demonstrate a qualified life of 10 inside containment and 20 years outside containment. LP&L's review cecermined that the only age-sensitive materials used in the 1153A transmitter that were different from that used in the 1153B transmitter is the circuit board.
The aging analysis performed by LP&L for the 1153A transmitter conservatively took into account the component activation energies of the different circuit board materials usel in the 1153A transmitter. With the exception of the circuit board, the componcu activation energies of the ll53A transmitter are conservatively enveloped by the 1153B transmitter. As a result, LP&L considers the 1153B test report applicable to the 1153A transmitter by virtue of their similarity. For additional conservatism however, it is LP&L's intent to use the figures provided by Reference 1 as a qualified lifetime, i.e., 6.5 years inside containment and 19.3 years outside containment.
8403060306 840301 PDR ADOCK 05000382 40N E                     P3M                                                              fg

4 Page 2 W3P84-0096 3-A20.16 We understand that this information adequately addressec the NRC's concerns, therefere we request that this issue be closed out in the next SER supplement.
Yours very truly, l'                  b K. W. Cook Nucicar Support & Licensing Manager KWC/RMF/ch cc:               E.L. Blake, W.M. Stevenson, J. Wilson, G.L. Constable, H. Garg
  }
s I
_ . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ .}}