ML20203D721

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Licensee 970317 & 990111 Responses to GL 96-05, Periodic Verification of Design-Basis Capability of Safety-Related Motor-Operated Valves. Response Should Be Provided within 60 Days

ML20203D721
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	02/11/1999
From:	Chandu Patel NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Dugger C ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
References
GL-96-05, GL-96-5, TAC-M97117, NUDOCS 9902160311
Download: ML20203D721 (5)

Text

_, ,. ._-. - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr. Chirl:s M. Dugg:r Februtry 11, 1999

- Vics President Op: rations i Entergy Operations, Inc. 4 P. O. Box B  ;

Killona, LA 70066 '

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING GENERIC ,

LETTER (GL) 96-05 PROGRAM AT WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC -

STATION, UNIT 3 (TAC NO. M97117)  ;

Dear Mr. Dugger.

On September 18,1996, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued GL 96-05,'

" Periodic Verification of Dasign-Basis Capability of Safety-Related Motor-Operated Valves," to j request that nuclear power plant licensees establish a program, or ensure the effectiveness of an existing program, to verify on a periodic basis that safety-related motor-operated valves (MOVs) are capable of performing their safety functions within the licensing basis of the plant.

On March 17,1997, and January 11,1999, you submitted responses to GL 96-05 indicating the intent to implement the provisions of a Joint Owners Group (JOG) program on MOV Periodic Verification. Participation in the JOG program provides a benefit in reactor safety by licensees sharing expertise and information on MOV performance and minimizes the information needed  ;

by the NRC staff to review your response to GL 96-05. As a result of your commitment, the NRC staff requires only limited information to complete its GL 96-05 review for Waterford  !

Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3). l Enclosed is a request for additionalinformation regarding the GL 96-05 program at Waterford 3. The additionalinforrnation needed by the staff and the schedule to provide this information was discussed with your staff in a conference call on January 28,1999. You are requested to provide your response within 60 days of the receipt of this letter.

Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Chandu P. Patel, Project Manager Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Reactor Projects lil/lV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l Docket No. 50-382 (

3

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ encl: See next page i DISTRIBUTION:

gameutdilla PUBLIC PD4-1 r/f OGC C. Patel J.Hannon C.Hawes ,

i K. Brockman, RIV E. Adensam (EGA1) ACRS ,

I Document Name: RAl97117.WPD D OFC PM/PD4-1,s LA/PD4-1 PD/Pb-1 ,

NAME CPate CHaN JHannon

! DATE 1 /I /99 M/ $ /99 /99 COPY ,N/NO YES/NO hO

, , , , ,, f OFFICIAL RECORD COPY /

• /"$i L w] h',di %f l' 9902160311 990211 PDR ADOCK 0500 2 f{[ h g .'44e l

m erg p k,. UNITED STATES j

2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 3000H001 p%;'*****/ February 11, 1999 Mr. Charles M. Dugger Vice President Operations

Entergy Operations, Inc.

P. O. Box B Killona, LA 70066

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING GENERIC LETTER (GL) 96-05 PROGRAM AT WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 (TAC NO. M97117)

Dear Mr. Dugger:

On September 18,1996, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued GL 96-05,

" Periodic Verification of Design-Basis Capability of Safety Related Motor-Operated Valves," to request that nuclear power plant licensees establish a program, or ensure the effectiveness of an existing program, to verify on a periodic basis that safety-related motor-operated valves (MOVs) are capable of performing their safety functions within the licensing basis of the plant.

On March 17,1997, and January 11,1999, you submitted responses to GL 96-05 indicating the intent to implement the provisions of a Joint Owners Group (JOG) program on MOV Periodic Verification. Participation in the JOG program provides a benefit in reactor safety by licensees sharing expertise and information on MOV performance and minimizes the information needed

by the NRC staff to review your response to GL 96-05. As a result of your commitment, the NRC staff requires only limited information to complete its GL 96-05 review for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3).

Enclosed is a request for additional information regarding the GL 96-05 program at Waterford 3. The additionalinformation needed by the staff and the schedule to provide this information was discussed with your staff in a conference call on January 28,1999. You are requested to provide your response within 60 days of the receipt of this letter.

Sincerely, Chandu P. Patel, Project Manager Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Reactor Projects lil/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-382

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ encl: See next page 1

~

Mr. Charles M. Dugger Entergy Operations, Inc. Waterford 3 cc:

Administrator Regional Administrator, Region IV Louisiana Radiation Protection Division U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 82135 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Baton Rouge, LA 70884 2135 Arlington, TX 76011 Vice President, Operations Resident inspector /Waterford NPS Support Post Office Box 822 Entergy Operations, Inc. Killona, LA 70066 P. O. Box 31995 Jackson, MS 39286 Parish President Council St. Charles Parish Director P. O. Box 302 Nuclear Safety & Regulatory Affairs Hahnville, LA 70057 Entergy Operations, Inc.

P. O. Box B Executive Vice-President Killona, LA 70066 and Chief Operating Officer Entergy Operations, Inc.

Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway P. O. Box 31995 P. O. Box 651 Jackson, MS 39286-1995 Jackson, MS 39205 Chairman General Manager Plant Operations Louisiana Public Service Commission Entergy Operations, Inc. One American Place, Suite 1630 P. O. Box B Baton Rouge, LA 70825-1697 i Killona, LA 70066 l l

Licensing Manager Entergy Operations, Inc.

P. O. Box B l Killona, LA 70066 '

Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20005 3502 i

I

O REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON RESPONSE OF WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 TO GENERIC LETTER 96-05

1. In the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Inspection Report No. 50-382/94-23, the NRC staff closed its review of the motor-operated valve (MOV) program implemented at Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3)in response to Generic Letter (GL) 89-10, " Safety-Related Motor-Operated Valve Testing and Surveillance," based on the results of the inspection and the licensee's commitment to resolve outstanding MOV issues as described in a letter dated November 11,1994. In the inspection report, the NRC staff discussed certain aspects of the licensee's MOV program to be addressed over the long term. For example, the inspectors noted that (1) the licensee agreed to update thrust calculations to include load sensitive behavior and stem friction coefficient test results that exceeded assumed values; and (2) the licensee's trending program was rudimentary and required additional enhancements. In addition to the NRC inspection report items, the licensee committed in its November 11,1994, letter to take specific actions, including updating its Planning Information Guide Notebook (PIGN) to identify maintenance activities that would require performance of a post-maintenance differential pressure test. The licensee should describe the actions taken to address the specific long-term aspects of the MOV program at Waterford 3 noted in the NRC inspection report and its letter dated November 11,1994.

2. In a letter dated March 17,1997, the licensee stated that it is participating in the Joint Owners Group (JOG) program on MOV Periodic Verification in response to GL 96-05.

On August 6,1997, the Combustion Engineering Owners' Group submitted Revision 2 of Topical Report MPR 1807 on the JOG program on MOV Periodic Verification. On October 30,1997, the NRC staff completed a safety evaluation concluding that the JOG program is an acceptable industry-wide response to GL 96-05, with certain conditions and limitations. The JOG program specifies that the methodology and discrimination criteria for ranking MOVs according to their safety significance are the responsibility of each participating licensee. In its letter dated March 17,1997, the licensee stated that static diagnostic testing would be based, in part, on an expert review and the Probabilistic Safety Assessrnent (PSA) for Waterford 3. The licensee should describe its methodology used for risk ranking MOVs at Waterford 3 in more detail. Although Waterford 3 is a pressurized water reactor (PWR) designed by Combustion Engineering, the licensee could obtain insights from the methodologies for MOV risk ranking provided by the Boiling Water Reactor Owners' Group (BWROG) in Topical Report NEDC 32264 (Revision 2, dated September 1996) and by the Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) in Engineering Report V-EC-1658-A (Revision 2, dated August 13,1998), and the NRC safety evaluations on the BWROG and WOG methodologies dated February 27,1996, and April 14,1998, respectively. For example, key aspects of the BWROG and WOG methodologies are the comparison of the licensee's MOV risk-ranking results to a sample list of MOVs identified as high risk at other plants designed by the applicable Nuclear Steam System Supplier, and the determination of the bases for differences in the MOV rankings.

3. The JOG program focuses on the potential age-related increase in the thrust or torque required to operate valves under their design-basis conditions. In the NRC safety evaluation dated October 30,1997, on the JOG program, the NRC staff specified that licensees are responsible for addressing the thrust or torque delivered by the MOV ENCLOSURE

i j .  ;

?

, l i

I

, 2-4 f

motor actuator and its potential degradation. The licenses should describe the plan at Waterford 3 for ensuring adequate ac and de MOV motor actuator output capability, including consideration of recent guidance in Limitorque Technical Update 98-01 and its l Supplement 1. -

I t

i i

f i

I r

[

l l

i l

l

. I l

m._ -