ML062230198

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Draft Request for Additional Information, License Amendment Request to Increase Surveillance Testing Interval for Intermediate Range Monitor
ML062230198
Person / Time
Site: Perry FirstEnergy icon.png
Issue date: 08/09/2006
From: Shawn Campbell
NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLIII-2
To: Dan Collins
NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLIII-2
Campbell S, NRC/NRR/DORL, 415-1486
References
TAC MD0144
Download: ML062230198 (3)


Text

August 9, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Daniel S. Collins, Chief Plant Licensing Branch III-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Stephen J. Campbell, Project Manager/RA/

Plant Licensing Branch III-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO 1 - DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI),LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO INCREASE SURVEILLANCE TESTING INTERVAL FOR INTERMEDIATE RANGE MONITOR (TAC MD0144)

The attached draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on August 4, 2006, to Mr. Henry Hegrat of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company in preparation for an upcoming conference call. Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to identify areas where clarification may be needed, as well as determine and agree upon a schedule for responding to the RAI. This memorandum and its attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent a Nuclear Regulatory Commission position.

Docket No. 50-440

Attachment:

As stated CONTACT: S. Campbell, NRR 301-415-1486

August 9, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Daniel S. Collins, Chief Plant Licensing Branch III-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Stephen J. Campbell, Project Manager/RA/

Plant Licensing Branch III-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO 1 - DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI), LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO INCREASE SURVEILLANCE TESTING INTERVAL FOR INTERMEDIATE RANGE MONITOR (TAC MD0144)

The attached draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on August 4, 2006, to Mr. Henry Hegrat of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company in preparation for an upcoming conference call. Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to identify areas where clarification may be needed, as well as determine and agree upon a schedule for responding to the RAI. This memorandum and its attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent a Nuclear Regulatory Commission position.

Docket No. 50-440

Attachment:

As stated CONTACT: S. Campbell, NRR 301-415-1486 Accession No: ML062230198 Office LPL3-2/PM LPL3-2/BC Name SCampbell DCollins Date 8/4/06 8/9/06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNIT NO. 1 (PNPP)

LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO INCREASE SURVEILLANCE TESTING INTERVAL FOR INTERMEDIATE RANGE MONITOR DOCKET No. 50-440 By letter dated February 14, 2006, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML0605404390), FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, the licensee, requested a change to Technical Specification 3.3.1.1, Intermediate Range Monitoring [IRM]

Instrumentation Mode 5 CHANNEL FUCTIONAL TESTING. The proposed amendment would revise the frequency of the Mode 5 IRM CHANNEL FUNCTIONAL TEST contained in TS 3.3.1.1 from 7 to 31 days.

In order for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff to complete its review of the licensees amendment request, the NRC staff requests that the licensee provide responses to the following questions.

1. Page 5, of Enclosure 1, under Updated Safety Analysis Report, states that the surveillance requirement for Mode 2 has not been revised and therefore that function would be assured. However, the NRC staff is concerned that changes in Mode 5 surveillance requirement may also impact on the operability of the function in Mode 2.

Explain the basis for your rationale.

2. Page 7, Enclosure 1, second paragraph, This paragraph identifies many failures of the affected component of IRM function. Explain how these failures were discovered; during test or in between test.
3. Page 7, Enclosure 1, second paragraph, This paragraph identifies multiple failures of S4 switch. However, it does not state the total number of failures and the effect of these failures such as could it have prevented the IRM trip.

DRAFT