ML20011D101
| ML20011D101 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1988 |
| From: | Udy A EG&G IDAHO, INC., IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011D102 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-D-6002 EGG-NTA-7414, GL-83-28, TAC-63791, NUDOCS 8910270167 | |
| Download: ML20011D101 (19) | |
Text
c _. . ._ _ _ _ _ ___ _ . .__ _ _ _ ..__ _ __ _ _ .._.... _ _ _ _.__ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ ._ _ _ ... _ _ _. ._. _.. _ _ . _ _.
,v:-= M une : l
, 1 i
' , , , , EGG.NTA-7414 ;
v ,. . .' July 1988 s
i 4
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
- r. < .
2.s g*5%
g CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2,2,1-.
- -L -- e=." W i EQUIPMENT CLAS$lFICATION FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY RELATED COMPONENTS: V0GTLE 1/-2 s.. h8DPR,i."
3
%J gg t t f- : _; Alan C. Udy
. =.
(.. .,.
u u.,
7 i ' :j9f.~
d.- .
1,. ._;.
h'k. a 4
,~ . . . .-
1 -
1 1- m~ ...
Prepared for the y'). a.. _ . U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
l M -
swM" -
. . fi.% - m a= =
, ,,
- 3:. .
." p
- =;; * %
_ _ L;. .:-
.x 999 7Ol i
, , , , , , _ , , , .a 6 .a. *4^ ^ - > -#*** ' - * - - ^-~-'#^ ~ '# ' * "
'9 G
g 4
. g s
G NOTICE Tnk repen sus pnewed e as assoas et eart speseend by as semer d the Walted State Government. Neder the Ushed Seus Government aer any apesy therest, nor egy et their ensimyss, asha any warraery, apresed er impted, or ausses any legni liakitty er reopensikdky for any third party's
- use, er the rendes et sash ass, of any interiandes, apparatus, product er pret.
ans diedened is this report, or represeau that its use by sussi thiril party wouW aos lairlags prtensely owned nahas. *
( -
V
= i :: ,3; :e 's i u3g .s -
t EGG-NTA-7414 ;
. t i
i TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT P
CONFORMANCE.TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM-2.2.1: '
EQUIPMENT- CLASSIFICATION FOR ALL OThER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS--V0GTLE-1/-2 .I Co:ket Nos. 50-424/50-425 '
1l 5
.i Alan C. Udy
't t
+
-i Dublisne: July 19BB ,
1 i
' . Idaho National Engineering Laboratory I EG&G I:ano, Inc.
Idaho Falls, Icaho 83415
I P*epared #0r the ~
U.S. Nuclear Regulatcay Commission
-Wasnington. 0.C. 20555 '
Under DOE Cent-act No. DE-ACC7-76I;01570 '
FIN No. 06002 ~
s s: 3 3 rai 4
s F
- . , , , , ' er e +--r-- -w-=w-<r-*---e e-,ee- +e,* ,, ,. +-ar--- -- - .=- + - --a--eve- -++e-
p- ,
E;.*
.4
! ,- ... . 6.
f .
s s.
ABSIRACT r
Inis ES&G ldahe, Inc. , re: ort ::ocuments tne review of the suomittals frem Uni: Nos. I an0 2 of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant for
- nfor ance to Ger. erie Letter 83-28, Item 2.2.1.
l Oo:ket Nos. 50-424/50-425 l
l'
- j. 11 1
k?0 x.e l ,
p- ,
se :
e; ;. .. ,;. -e
's:
- s 5
~
T &
t i
FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the program for evaluating
.11:ensee/acolicant conformance to Generic letter 83-28 " Required Actions Based on= Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events." This work is being
- ncutted 'or-the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nu ! ear Reactor Regulation, Division of Engineering and System Technology, by EG&G 1 Idaho,.Inc., Ele:trical,finstrumentation, and Control Systems Evaluation Unit.
~he U.S,_ Nuclear Regulatory C0mmission funded this work under the ,
a tno*f:ation S&R No. 20-19-40-41-3, :IN No. 06002.
l l
Oo ket No. 50-424/50-425
p= y-s Ah.
pt--
,1 E
y
', 4 y :& '
.J . *' ..
ot >
6( ,
p CONTENTS o
( I Ae.S..AC.
in
...................... ii ruR:a.
,R0 ..,............... ................................. ......... iii r
.N...,..,...
- 6. iNwwwwi.w N ... .
t
~
........................ 1
, 2.
V R EVI EW CONiiNT AND FO RMAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . . . .
3.
ITEM 2.2.1 - PRCGRAM ............................................. 3 3.1 3.2 Guideline ........................ ......................... 3 3.3: Evaluati:n ......................
Conclusion ................................................. 3
.......................... 4 4
ITEM 2.2.1.1 - IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA .. ........................ 5 4.1 Guiceline ....... ... ...
.......................... 5
- valuation ..
2 ... .. .
......................... 5 4.3 Conclusion ... .. ................................ ........ 5 5.
! TEM 2.2.1.2 - INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM ....................... 6 5.1 Guideline ............ ..
................................. 6 5.2 Evaluation ..... ... .. ..... ...... .... ................ 6 5.3 Con:Tusion ... .
.. ............ ...... 6
- 6. ...M
..: 2.2.,.3 4 - ,,5:. Or. ...,..y.N.
- ,u.* . . ...dSiritmetwN
.......n L.S..NG 4 it , ........ ;
7-r 6.1 Guideline ....
.. .. .... ......... ... ......... . . ... 7 t2 :v a l'Jati 0 n . . ....
...... ....... . .... ... .............. . 7 1
6.3 Conclusion ..
.. ... ........... .......... _........... 7
/ .**:
. ..u. 2 . .o . .? . .* . MANAsi:e
.M..:
. N*i .raN*6RO.S .
............. .......... . ... 8 7.'. 3Ji0eline .........
. .. .... ...... .. ...... . .... 3
.2 : valuation ..... . .. .... . .... ........... ...... ..... 3 7.3 Conclusion ...... .. ......... ......... . ..... ..... . 8 t
' TEM L.2.1.5 - DESIGN VERIFICATION AND PROC'JREMENT ............... 9 s.1 Guideline ..... . ..... .. .... .................... .... 9 3.2 Evaluation . ... .... .. .. ...... ...... ............... 9 3.3 Conclusion ..... ....... . ............ ....... . ....... 9
- 9. *~EM 2.2,1.6 "!4PORTANT TO SAFETY COMPONENTS . .... . ..... . 10 3.1 3.ideline ... . ... .. . . .... ... .. 10 gn. enyesW.Wgi .s y'
.d WW. .W . . . . . . . . ... . . . 9
. . ~:
- 5. ::T:.N,e
.~ L. ). . ..
. . . . . ... . A2 V
m yj w. I i + 5 .. $'i I CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.1: EQUIPMENT CLASSI ICATION FOR ALL CTHER S AFETY-RELATED CCMDONENTS--VCGILE-1/-2
- 1. INTRODUCT!ON On February 25, 1983, botn of the scram circuit breakers at Unit 1 of the Salem Nu: lear Power Plant failed to open t.pon an automatic reactor trip signal from the rea: tor protection system. -This incident was terminated-manually by r.he operator about 30 seconds af ter the initiation of the -
automati trip signal. The failure of the circuit breaters was determined to be related to the sticking of the undervoltage trip attachment. Prior to tnis inci:ent, on February 22, 1983, at Unit 1.of the Salem Nuclear Power Diant,-an automatic trip signal was generated cased on stean generator low-low level during plant startup. In this case, the reactor was tri:pec manually by the operator almost coincidentally with the automatic trip.
- cIlowing these incicents, on February 23, 1983, the NRC Executive Cirector for Coerations (ECO), cire:ted the NRC staff to investigate and eocet on tne generf: implications of tnese occurrences at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear P0wer Plant. The results of the staff's inquiry into the generi: imolications of the Salem unit incidents are reported in SURE3-1CCO, " Generic !mplications of tne ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear I
- -er :! ant." As a result of tnis investigation, one Commission (NRC) 1 re:uestec (by beneric Letter 83-23 cated July 8,1983') all licensees of oce-ating reactors, applicants for an operating license, and holders Of Cons ru: tion permits to respond to the generic issues raised by the analyses of these two ATWS events.
This report is an evaluation of the responses submitted by the Georgia Power ::mpany, tne applicant for the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, for
- tem 2.2.; c' Generic Letter 33-28. Ine cocuments reviewed as a part of tnis eva!uation are listed in the refere m s at t o end of this report.
1
,- .q.~,
2. REVIEW CONTENT AND FORMAT ' L to submit,Item 2.2,l of Generic Letter 83-28 requests the for the staff revtew, licensee or a plicant . a description of their programs for safety in related considerable equipment detall, 45 classification includingormation, . supporting inf i L within this report. indicated in the guideline section for each item i As previously Indicated, each of the six items of it em 2.2.1 15 evaluated in a separate section in which the guideline sented; an is pre evaluation of the licensee's/ applicant's response is mac e; and conclusions about the programs of the licensee or applicant for safet y related equipment classification are drawn. Y l ' 2
m- , 1 e
's : g. 5 e
- 3. ITEM 2.2.1 - PRC3 RAM 3.1 Gutee1<ne Licensee and a:Plicants should confirm that an equipment classift:ation program. exists snat_provides assurance that all safety-related ecmponents s are cesignated as. safety-related on plant documentation and in the '
information handling systei.' tnat controls safety related activities. The purpose of this program is to ensure that personnel performing activities that' af fect such safety-related temponents are aware that they are working on safety-related components and are guided by safety-related p ocedures and constraints. Features of this program are evaluated in the remainder of nis re: ort. 3.2 Evaluation The apolicant for the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant resconded to -i these requirements with submittals dated November 8, 1983,2 May 20, 1935, anc March 28, 1933.# inese submittals included
'nformation trat ces: ribe the aoplicant's safety-related equipment
- 'assif':ation crogram. In :ne review of the . Iicant's responte to inis item it was assumed tnat the information and de:umentation supporting tnis
;-ogram is availaole for audit upon re:uest.
T e so:l': ant states tnat al'+ safety-related :m;cnents and : arts are
- . a s s i e: as sucn in accordance with tne " Project Reference Manual,"
Dar C, Section 13. ~It also defines design criterion CC-1010. 0C-1C10 l~ controls the project classification list that is located in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), Table 3.2.2-1. Tre aoplicant states that the safety-related classification of
- m::aeats is anotated on the Q-list, the project classification list, e:u': eat 'ists, ?&!D's, procurement specifications, material control lists, s:ecification cor.troi 10g, the safety analysis re;crt, and other pertinent
- cuments.
3
(- r ., i.. -,, '. . .'
, , I l
3.3 -Conclusion
.We have -reviewed the' applicant's information and find that the a7pitcant's response is adequate in responding to this it l
em and is at:eptable. e n l. l 4 4 4
- . 1 4 i f.- ,
* '* - *L .
4 m f,: 4 ITEM 2.2.1.1 - ICENTIFICATION ORITERIA 4.1 Gaideline The acclicant or licensee should confirm that their program used fer-equi; ent classification includes criteria used for identifying components as safety-related, t? .E v_. iation.
-( , -
- cl. t tne criteria used to classify :tructures, 33 ..n. '-
3o.. ':
.erts are contained in the Vogtle Electric
'n; ';..; d: ;egt 6 'e t- e
- u_il. Tr applicart, wnile not listing
'J e " sta'e '.nat +'. e tsr .
1 t: .
- or'orm witn tn guidance of
.< * ; ' . . .,c' Jr l .16 (Rev. 3,, ' f,' 'J" Greco Cla ai fications are _Standa rds "
#r_ eu fh ; n gd b dica tive-Wa f :.'.+si+,ngj,emoonents C .
of Nuclear Power 014.'.ts, and Regu'atrey Guide 1.29 ( es. 3), Seismic Cesign Classification. 4.3 Conclusion ' 4 Ine acolicant's response to tnis item is consicered to be complete. Therefore, the a;plicant's response for this item is acceptable. 5
+;ti >
;p .' *:
1 5. ITEM 2.2.1.2 - INFORMATION HANDLING S 5.1 Guideline The licensee or applicant should confirm that th e program for , equipment classification includes an information handli used to identify safety-related components. ng system that is that this information handling system includes a lithe response shoul st of safety related equipment and that procedures exist to govern its develop ment and validation. 5.2 Eva'vation The applicant states that the information nandli . Table 3.2.2.1 of the FSAR, " Classification of ng St system consists of Systems." An instrument index, an equipment indexructure, Components, and ( supplement and detail Table 3.2.2.1. , and a valve index of the procedures used in the development and validationT and associated indices. of Table 3.2.2.1 t 1 of these lists prior.to operation.The architect / engineer maintains s I maintains singular control of these lists duringThe nuclear op piant oceaatfor. I 5.3 Cenclusion The applicant's resoonse to this item is conside Therefore, the applicant s res0onse for this it red to Oe complete. i em is aC ectab l e. l l l l 6 I b
~
y z - - p: . ..
- p. -
s._ ., V 6 .' " ITEM 2.2.1.3 - USE OF EOUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION LISTING 6.1 Guideline The-licensee's or applicant's description should' confirm that the program for eculpment classification includes criteria-and procedures that govern .how station personnel use the equipetnt classification information handling system to determine that an activity is safety-related. The description should also include the procedures for maintenance, surveillance, parts replacement, and other activities defined in the introduction to 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, that apply to safety-related components. 6.2 Evaluation The applicant states tnat plant administrative procedures direct station personnel to the instrument, equipment and valve indices to
. identify quality requirements, safety-related components, and to icentify safety-* elated maintenance requests and purchase activities. These incices a-e designed and usec as an aid to the use of FSAR Tacle 3.2.2.1.
6.3 Conclusion We find snat the applicant's description of plant acministrative
- nt cis anc crocedures meets tne requirements of tnis item. TV..afore, tne li:easee's response for tnis item is acceptacle, i
7
____ ____ _ . - . - -~~ ~ ^ ' ~ ~ ~ - ml
'r 5.
jg > . : * >
- i. .
7. ITEM 2.2.1.4 - KANAGEMENT CONTROLS 7.1 Guideline l The applicant-or ifcensee should briefly describe the management i controls that are used to verify that the procedures for the preparation , validation, anc routine utill;ation of the information hanc)ing been and are being followed. ave system h,l I I 7.2 Evaluation i l The applicant's response to this item states that Quality assurance audits and reviews, both corporate staff and plant, V plant activities. periodically review all On stte audits of record management and document control use vendor supplied information. L The applicant also states that-procedu es control the use of the information handling system by architect engi i companies and that this use is also subject to quality assurance audits ,
; w The applicant states that FSAR Table 3.2.2-1 and the related indices ,
e e prepared and validated by the architect /enginee r. The architect / engineer's quality assurance department audited and controlled the development system. of the Vogtle ecuipment classification information hanclin ' 7.3 Conclusion We find that the management controls used by the licensee assure that the information handling system is maintained, is current intended. , and is used as Therefore, the licensee's response for this item is acceotable. 8
.p; ,_ --. - ---
n - 8 f_', - .' ? } .O I S. ITEM 2.2.1.5 - CESIGN VERIFICATION AND PSOCUREMENT p 8.1 Guideline ine applicant's scenittals snould document that past usage
~
I demonst.*ates tnat acpropriate design verification and.cualift:ation testing are spe:ied for the procurement of safety related :cmponents and parts. The specification should include qualification testing for the expected safety-service conditions and should provide support for the applicant's receipt of testing documentation to support the limits of life recommended oy the supplier. If such documentatien is not available, confirmation that tne present program meets these requirements should be provided. S.2 Evaluation The applicant states tnat procurement specifications-for safety-related components include cualification testing for the expected' servi:e conditions. Fur:Fer, the acclicant states that the testing
- cumentation is reviewed to support the supplier recommended service life.
S.3 C:nclusion Altnough the applicant did not specify the design criteria applied to
~
tnis item, we conclude that the applicant has accressed the concerns of t-is item. Theref:re, tne licensee's esponse for nis item is :ensidered L a::ectacie. 1 l l t-
> 3:
9 l l
, _. - . .. - - - - - - - - _ _- , .- ---- -- - - - ~ ~
.a 3 .a-
. 9. ITEM 2.2.1.6
"!MPORTANT TO SAFETY" COMPONENTS .
9.1 Guideline 4
- -Generic Letter 83-28 states that the applicant's or licensee's equipment classification program should include (in addition to tne safety related components) a broader class of components designated as "Important to-Safety."
However, since the ger.eric letter does not require
'the applicant to furnish this information as part of.their
- response, this item will not be reviewed.
. s.
I 5 n l' i-1 10 l
~'
p(:;y . ;: . , yu c
,b,:c- .4 #; '*J ,._- . n* , ,) ,
7_ '10. . CONCLUSION r Based on our review of the applicant's response to the specific rnoutrements of Item 2.2.1, we fine tnat the information proviced by the applicant .to resolve' these concerns e.eets the requirements of Generic
. Letter 53-23 and is acceptable.
Item 2.2.1.6 was not reviewed as noted in Section 94 1. I !:7 1 k i G
;[ ee 9 a
,.f:
;;c
<. Y ' *. . .. '
- 11. REFERENCE 3
- 1. .
Appilcants for Operating License, and Holders o on Permi ts ,
" Required (Generic LetterActions Based 83-28)," July on 8, 1983, Generic Implications of Salem AT vents 2.
" Generic Letter 83-28", NovemceeLatter, . G.Georgia Adensam), Power Co
'3. 8, 1983 Log: GN-276 Fi1 2: K6BK10.
." Letter, Georgia Generic Letter 83-28", Power May 20, Company 1985. Log:(J. A. Bailey) to NRC (E 4 GN-613, File: X6BK10.
Lett r, Georgia Power Company (L. T. Gucwa) to NRC Generic Letter 83-28 " March 28. 1988, LL-4413.0852m, , X7GJ17-V210.
"SER Open Ite F
i . l i 8
.c h
i 12
o ,8s & , 4tt.*agnes 13 0 33 w&etwsktaateena.ge, m i et.oe, ..e.ste sangeur av ,,0C r we .. . . . 7/#' SSUOORAPHIC DATA SMEEY.. leti.8,8.C,eD.8o. ,*4elvte84 EGG.NTA-7414
.CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEM 2.2.1--
EOUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION FOR ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS: V0GTLE-1/-2 . o.,i ae.o ' co .eio
. . . . .o a ' j July 1988 Alan C. Udy e o.'e ae.oa, u so j , , .. . . .... o. c . . . : . . .o. . . .. e. .. .. . .. . ,, . i - c .
Julv 14RR
.%.e,,....,...
EG4G Idaho. Inc.
~
P.0.-Box 1625 '**"**'*'" Idaho Falls. ID 83415 06002
,e.......a....,..........................<.e. .. ....
- e.oa, Ddvision of Encineering and Systein Technology Technical Evaluation Report Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Washington DC 20555
,, .m..........,.
,......em.-....
This EG&G Idaho Inc. recort provides a review of the submittals from- ' h Unit Nos.1 and 2 of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant regardir:' conformance to Generic Letter 83-28-. Item 2.2.1. t 1 1' 306..t9' .%..*,, . . l * *0mo. O f lC. . 9 0s..
...w.,i.4.>.,.*..
it. .. Unlimited Distribution
.s se e. . .,- . . n . .e . o.
f
, 3.... 4.i3... .eeo.....
Un$ssifie Unclassified
,......3..3i
. . ,,, c i 5
, .- . .}}