ML20236K090

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Item 4.2 (Parts 3 & 4) of Generic Ltr 83-28.Review of 831104 Response to Parts 3 & 4 of Item 4.2 Re WCAP-10835, Rept of DS-416 Reactor Trip Breaker... Not Acceptable.Info Due within 60 Days

ML20236K090
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	08/04/1987
From:	Reeves E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Mcdonald R ALABAMA POWER CO.
References
GL-83-28, TAC-53909, NUDOCS 8708060407
Download: ML20236K090 (5)

Text

__-__-_____________-____

AUG 4 1987 Docket Nos. 50-348 DISTRIBUTION and 50-364 Docket File A. Toalston NRC & Local PRDs ACRS (10)

Mr. R. P. Mcdonald PD21 r/f F. Rosa Senior Vice President S. Varga Alabama Power Company G. Lainas Post Office Box 2641 P. Anderson Birmingham, Alabama 35291-0400 E. Reeves (2)

OGC-B

Dear Mr. Mcdonald:

E. Jordan J. Partlow

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR ITEM 4.2 (PARTS 3 AND 4) 0F GENERIC LETTER 83 JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC 53909)

Generic Letter 83-28, Item 4.2, requires licensees to describe the preven-tative maintenance and surveillance program for ensuring reliable reactor trip breaker (RTB) operation. Parts 3 and 4 of Item 4.2 relate to life testing and periodic replacement of RTBs or components consistent with the

[

demonstrated life cycles of the RTBs.

1 Our review of your November 4,1983, response to Parts 3 and 4 of Item 4.2 indicates that you were involved in the Westinghouse Owner's Group (WOG) in developing a specific life testing program for the RTBs. We have found the WOG program of WCAP-10835, " Report of the DS-416 Reactor Trip Breaker Undervoltage and Shunt Trip Attachments Life Cycle Tests," not to be an acceptable response to the concerns of the Generic Letter 83-28. On that basis, we request a response to the enclosed request for information at your earliest convenience, but at least within 60 days of receipt of this letter.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not recuired under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely, M/

Edward A. Reeves, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II

Enclosure:

As stated cc: See next page nA LA:fD2.1;0RPR P RPR f) bb D:PD2 : D,RPR PAnddrson EReeves/dsf EAdensam 8/q/87 8/ /87 8/ 87 8708060407 870804 PDR P

ADOCK 05000348 PDR

_-_-_-_-_A

l

! Nr. R. P. McDorald l Alaban,a Power Com any Joseph K. Farley Muclear Plant Cc:

Mr. W. O. Whitt D. Biaro kacGuineas, Esquire Executive Vict President Volpe, Boskey and Lyons Alabaraa Pcwer Company 918 16th Street, N.W.

Post Office Box 2041 Washington, DC 20000 l Birmingham, Aletarra 35291-0400

! Charles P. Lowman l Fr. Louis B. Lcng, General Manager A16bama Electric Corporation ls Southern Company Services, Inc. Fost Office Eox 550 i Post Office Box 2625 Andalusia, Alabama 3E420 l Birmingham, Alatarra 35202 l

l Chairman Regicnal Administrator, Region 11 Houston Cour.ty Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission i

, Octhan. Alabama 36301 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esquire Shaw, Pittr.an, Potts anc Trowbrince Claude Earl Fox, M.D.

230L H Street, N.W. State Health Officer Washington, DC 20C37 State Department of Public Health State Office Euilding Ventgomery, Alabama 36130 Robert A. Euettner, Esquire i Balch, Bingham, Baker, Hawthorne, Mr. J. D. Woodard l Williams and Ward General Mc. nager - Nuclear Plant Post Office Box 306 Post Office Ecx 470 Birminghan, Alabarre 35201 Ashfor d, Alabana 36312 l F.esident lo.spector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Post Office Box 24 Route 2 Columbia, Alabama 36319

l i

. \

j l

PF0 VEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION q

ITEM 4.2 (PARTS 384) 0F GENERIC LE1TEP 83-28 1 JOSEPH M, FAPLFY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AhD 2 i

1 Item 4.2 of Generic l.etter 83-2E requires licensees or applicants to describe their prev 6htative maintenance ar.d surveillance preoran fcr ensurino reliabic '

Parts 3 and 4 of item 4.2 pertain te reactor trip (PTB) breaker operatier:.

lif e testing of an acceptable sanple size of the breakers, and pericdic replace-The r,tr.t of the breakers or components consistent with demonstrated life cycles.

licensee submitted a response to Item 4.2 (Parts 3&4) by letter dated November 4, 1983.

In that response, the licensee indicated that they were working with the Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) tc deselop a specific precram for life testing of the reactor trip breakers.

The purpcse of the life testing is to identify a qualified life for the. hTB or By definition, any o' its replaceable comrcnents as required by 10 CFR 50.55(h).

qualified life is the period of time for which satisfactory performance can be demonstrated for a specific set ci service corditions. The c, qualification methods that can be used to deterrine the qualified lift, including the effects of aging, IEEE Standarc 323-1974 provices guiaance are identified in IEEE Standard 323-1974  ;

er aging based on an awareness that the ability of Class 1E ec,uipment to perform l l

its safety function may be uffected by changes that result fror natural, operc-The concept of aging was accreraed tional, and environmental phencrrena over tinte.

The agirg guicance there-explicitly for the first time in IEEE Standerd 323-1974 in reflects the requirement of IEEE Standard 279, which is the standera specific-ally menticned in 10 CFR 50.55a(h). Conformance with IEEE Standard 323-1974 is an acceptable trethod of treeting the rcouirements of 10 CFR 50.f fa(h).

l l

Westinghouse has presented the results of cyclic testing on the DS-416 RTE ir.

kCAP-1CEJE " Report cf the 0$-41f Peactor Trip Breaker Urdervoltage and Shun; l

Trip Attachments Life Cycle Tests." WCAP-10835 addresses only cyclic testdr.9 on PTE trip attechtrents. It r,t'ther addresses life cualitication of the PTLs ncr noncyclic life-lir?. ting or perf ormance-c'egrading phenomena (i.e., aging) for the trip attachments.. Therefore, WCAP-1CE3f does not constitute ar. eccept-able responte to the concern of the (!cneric letter.

1

I l

-E-I 2

If it con be demonstrated that the cualificc' life of the RTB exceedsInthe a life of thr plant, then the specific cualifiec life need not be identified.

practical sense, the intent of the lif e testino requirertnt of the generic letter woulc be satisfied by demonstrating thet the qualified life of the breaker (for the tripping function) execeds the expected use projected to the next refutling.

Cycle testing by the various owners groups, although it does not consider the effects of aging, may provice evidence to support continued use o' the RTBs for one additional refueling cycle, provided that the individual breaker has ritt shown any sign of degradation in the applicant's Pararetric Treno Mcnitorine Program. In this approach, the actual qualified life is not specifically icenti-fied, but is only derconstrated to be adeouate. 1 l

323-1974 is an acceptable Ongoing life testing, as described in IEEE Standard alternative to forme.1 life testing for the purpose of establishing a specific j qualified lift for RTBs. Ongoing life tetting will demonstrate that the l

l cualified life, though not specifically known, is longer (in terms of cycles I and time) than the integrated service that wili be accumulated through the next refueling interval. The description of an ongeing ovalification program should include the following:

(1) estimate cf the number of demands be' ween refueling outages to which the RTE must resperc', and the basis for the estimate, i

(2) definition of relevant, end-of-life related f ailures (Note that randora failures occurring during the constant hazard rete portion of the "bathtut curve" (plot of failure rate vs. time) are not relevant to a life test.

The lictnsee should (a) ident fy the possible failure trades, (b) categorize 4

each tailure mode as an end-of-life type or not, and (c) present t rethod-clogy for categorizing future failures not idcntified in (a).

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

e i l

l, I

\

I I

i

)

The staff finds that the 71censee has not committed to a life testing prcgrar.. l The licensee shoule qualify their breakers by (1) actual life testing of the f

breakers, including aging, on an acceptable sample size or (M establishirig an If the firt,t alternative is selected, the licensee ongoing life testing prograri. If the should present the results of the life testirg to the statf for review.  ;

second 61ternative is selected, the licensee shoula otscribe their ongoing life testing progrant, including the three items listed above. l t

l 1

l l

l 1

,1

_