Letter Sequence Meeting |
|---|
|
|
MONTHYEARML13308A1761982-08-12012 August 1982
Summary of 820729 Meeting W/Util & Contractors Re ESF Actuation Sys Surveillance Requirements.Addl Info Requested to Support Proposed Tech Spec Changes
Project stage: Meeting
ML13323A3331982-10-0707 October 1982
Requests Addl Info to Complete Review of ESFAS Subgroup Relay Tech Spec,Per
Project stage: Approval
ML13302A6331984-01-25025 January 1984
Forwards Amend Applications 23 & 9 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively,revising Tech Spec 3/4.3.2 Re ESF Actuation Instrumentation to Require Testing of Certain Relays at 6-month Intervals.Amend Fee Encl
Project stage: Other
ML20079M3371984-01-25025 January 1984
Proposed Changes to Tech Spec 3/4.3.2 Re ESF Actuation Sys Instrumentation to Require Testing of Certain Relays at 6-month Intervals
Project stage: Request
ML20079M3341984-01-25025 January 1984
Amend Applications 23 & 9 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15, Respectively,Revising Tech Spec 3/4.3.2 Re ESF Actuation Instrumentation to Require Testing of Certain Relays at 6-month Intervals
Project stage: Other
ML13310B3531984-04-13013 April 1984
Forwards Annual Rept,San Diego Gas & Electric,1983, City of Riverside,Ca Comprehensive Annual Financial Rept for Fy Ending 830630, Southern California Edison 1983 Annual Rept & City of Anaheim Public Utils Annual Rept 1983
Project stage: Request
ML20106J9581984-09-24024 September 1984
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 24 & 13 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively
Project stage: Approval
ML20106J9201984-09-24024 September 1984
Amends 24 & 13 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively, Modifying Tech Specs to Change Max Surveillance Interval for ESF Actuation Sys Subgroup Relays from 6 to 18 Months
Project stage: Other
ML20207K2701985-11-22022 November 1985
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 38 & 27 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively
Project stage: Approval
ML20207K2671985-11-22022 November 1985
Amends 38 & 27 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively, Modifying Tech Specs Re Electrical Power Sys
Project stage: Other
ML20207K2611985-11-22022 November 1985
Forwards Amends 38 & 27 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15, Respectively & Safety Evaluation.Amends Modify Tech Specs 3/4.8.1.1, Electrical Power Sys - AC Sources - Operating & 3/4.8.1.2, Electrical Power Sys - AC Sources - Shutdown
Project stage: Approval
ML20198H3341986-05-16016 May 1986
Amends 46 & 35 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively, Revising Tech Spec Section 3/4.6.3, Containment Isolation Condition for Operation,Action Statements & Surveillance Requirements
Project stage: Other
ML20198H3531986-05-16016 May 1986
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 46 & 35 to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,respectively
Project stage: Approval
1984-04-13
[Table View] |
Text
DISTRIBUTION Document Control(50-361/362)
NRC PDR L PDR I&E PRC SYSTEM Regional Adm.
NSIC Resident Inspector LB#3 Reading R. Stevens Docket Nos. 50-361/362 JLee D. Brinkman HRood J. Rosenthal Attorney, OELD D. Hoffman APPLICANTS: Southern California Edison Company (SCE)
C. Rossi San Diego Gas & Electric Company City of Anaheim, California City of Riverside, California FACILITY:
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 & 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING TO DISCUSS ESFAS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS On July 29, 1982, members of the NRC staff met with SCE and their contractors to discuss the above subject. Attendees at the meeting are given in Enclosure
- 1. The material presented at the meeting by SCE are given in Enclosure 2.
The purpose of the meeting was to present a proposed change in the Unit 2 Technical Specifications which would extend the surveillance interval for the ESFAS subgroup relays from 6 months to 18 months.
Following a discussion of the issue, the NRC staff stated that the following additional information would be required to support the proposed Technical Specification change:
A. Provide a list of ESF relays and the components associated with each that:
- 1. Cannot be tested at power.
- 2. Can be tested at power but only by manually defeating and subsequently restoring, the ESF train.
- 3. Can be tested at power without defeating the ESF train, but are operationally burdensome to test.
B. Provide a justification for the 18 month testing frequency, considering:
- 1. Conformance to IEEE-338.
- 2. Quantification of degradation of availability on demand.
- 3. The benefits of increasing the testing interval to 18 months from the standpoint of:
(a) Safety (b) Cost Original Signed By:
8208260600 820812 Harry Rood, Project Manager PDR ADOCK 05000361 LcnigBac 1
P PDR Licensing Branch #3 n--
Diiciong of l-icen inn DL:L#
C LB#3 OFFICE SURNAME.....
q
.R ogd.1........
ra~g,.. a............................... I......I.............
DATE.****...8*
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
